V^v 


lb 


/7/ji>av^^^^^^^*'^2*- 


^7^  2.      1 


^-t^i^^*-'  ..^i^C- 


LIBRARY 

. 

OF  THE 

"^ 

Theological   Seminar 

y. 

PRINCETON,    N.  J. 

....>^.STff.Sr^...3W\^0X\ ■_  . 

/.W^Secti,n 

- 

^ooA;, 

C  »  J     i:No>.. :., 

■» 

V 


c. 


PLEA 


FOR 


ON 


CATHOLICK  PRINCIPLES. 


BY  J.  M.  MASON,  D.D. 


NEW-YORK: 

PUBLISHED  BY  WHITING   AND  WATSON, 

Theological  and  Classical  Booksellers. 


Daniel  Faashaw,  Printer,  No.  10  CliflF-street, 

isTe. 


SOUTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  NEW-YORK.  ss. 
BE  IT  REMEMBERED,  tliat  on  the  twentieth  day  of  April,  in  the  fortieth  year  of 

the  Independence  of  the  United  States  of  America,  J.  M-  Mason,  of  the  said 
L  S.     district,  hath  deposited  in  this  office  the  Title  of  a  Book,  the  right  whereof  he 

claims  as  Authour  and  Proprietor,  in  the  words  following,  to  wit : 

"  A  Plea  for  Sacramental  Communion  on  Catholick  Principles.  By  J.  M. 
Mason,  D.  D." 

In  conformity  to  the  Act  of  the  Coneress  of  the  United  States,  entitled  "An 
Act  for  the  encouragement  of  Learninfr,  by  securing  the  copies  of  Maps,  Charts,  and 
Books,  to  the  Authours  and  Proprietors  ot  such  copies,  during  the  time  therein  men- 
tioned." And  also  to  an  act,  entitled  "An  Act,  supplementary  to  an  act,  entitled  an 
act  for  the  encouragement  of  Learning,  by  securing  the  copies  of  Maps,  Charts,  and 
Books,  to  the  Authours  and  Proprietors  ot  such  copies,  during  the  times  therein  men- 
tioned, and  extending  the  benefits  thereof  to  the  arts  of  Designing,  Engraving,  and 
Etching  Historical  auS  other  Prints.  ^^^^^^  ^^^^ 

Clerk  of  the  Soxtthtrn  District  of  New- York. 


PREFACE. 


So  long  a  time  has  elapsed  since  the  ensuing 
volume  was  promised,  that  the  authour  owes  an 
explanation  of  the  causes  which  have  retarded 
its  appearance. 

The  greater  part  of  what  was  at  first  intended 
for  the  press  had  been  prepared  nearly  two  years 
before  the  proposals  for  printing  it  were  issued. 
In  the  mean  time  the  subject  had  undergone  ex- 
tensive discussion,  and  had  excited  inquiry  in 
several  parts  of  the  United  States.  The  manu- 
script was  found,  upon  revision,  to  cover  too  nar- 
row ground  for  the  range  which  the  question  had 
taken ;  and  the  whole  was  to  be  written  over. 
This  labour,  faUing  in  with  numerous  and  urgent 
avocations  pressing  upon  an  impaired  state  of 
health,  proceeded,  and  could  proceed,  but  slow- 
ly. It  was  performed  at  short  and  broken  inter- 
vals :  The  work  swelled,  by  degrees,  beyond  its 
anticipated  limits,  was  interrupted  more  than 
once  by  the  authour's  absence  from  home ;  and 


IV  PREFACE. 

suspended  for  some  time  by  other  embarrass- 
ments. These  things,  it  is  hoped,  will  furnish  a 
reasonable  apology  for  the  delay. 

The  reader  will  probably  observe  that  the  same 
thoughts  recur  in  different  parts  of  the  work.  This 
was  in  some  measure  unavoidable,  from  the  af- 
finity between  topics  which  however  required  a 
separate  consideration.  Nor  was  there  much  so- 
licitude to  avoid  it,  as  it  is  of  benefit  to  many  in 
whose  minds  the  general  course  of  reasoning 
might  be  confused  or  enfeebled  without  the  aid 
of  occasional  repetitions. 

The  printed  proposals  describe  Part  II.  as 
consisting  of  "proof  from  authentick  facts ^  that 
'^sacramental  communion,  on  Catholick  princi- 
"  pies,  is  agreeable  to  the  faith  and  practice  of 
"  the  church  of  Christ,/rom  the  day  of  Pentecost 
'•  to  the  present  tirne^  with  a  few  local  and  party 
"  exceptions."  That  his  terms  may  not  be  stretch- 
ed beyond  his  meaning,  the  authour  thinks  it 
proi)er  to  disclaim  any  construction  which  may 
be  put  upon  them  inconsistent  with  his  own  elu- 
cidation in  ti:e  work  itself. 

The  reader  will  not  attribute  to  an  affectation 


PREFACE.  V 

of  learning,  the   Latin  and   Greek  quotations 
which  occupy  so   much  of  the  margin  in  the 
second  part.    Had  the  authour  consulted  merely 
his  own  wishes,  he  should  have  been  satisfied  with 
a  simple  reference  to  the  primitive  and  reform- 
ed writers.     But  as  they  are  extremely  scarce  in 
all  parts  of  our  country,  and  absolutely  inacces- 
sible in  most,  it  was  thought  necessary  to  subjoin 
the  original,  in  order  that  readers  who  have  the 
ability,  might  also  have  the  means,  of  judging 
whether  his  representations  are  correct  or  not. 
He  would  also  guard  against  a  misconception 
of  his  language  respecting  the  feelings  and  habits 
of  reHgious  sects  in  the  United  States.    It  might 
be  supposed  that  they  are  all  in  such  a  state  of 
.  mutual  hostiUty  as,  without  exception,  to  decline 
each  other's  communion.    Such,  however,  is  not 
the  fact.     Within  a  few  years  there  has  been  a 
manifest  relaxation  of  sectarian  rigour  in  several 
denominations.    And  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  in 
the  culture  of  fraternal  charity,  has  gained,  upon 
a  respectable  scale,  a  visible  and  growing  ascen- 
dancy. This  happy  alteration  may  be  attributed, 
in  a  great  degree,  to  the  influence  of  Missionary 
and  Bible  Societies. 


VI  PREFACE. 

Still  there  is  room  for  complaint,  humiliatioHj 
and  rebuke;  andremarksof  such  a  character  must 
be  viewed  as  referring  to  those  among  whom  the 
Sectarian  continues  to  lord  it  over  the  Christian, 
May  that  preposterous  inversion  come  speedily 
to  an  end!  May  the  Catholicism  of  "grace  and 
truth"  wax  stronger  and  stronger,  till  "  Ephraim 
shall  not  envy  Judah,"  nor  "Judah  vex  Eph- 
raim"— the  lust  of  sect  being  overcome  and  ba- 
nished by  the  all-subduing  love  of  God  our  Sa- 
viour! Amen! 

JSTeiO'  Yorl,  ^flpril  16,1816. 


INTRODUCTION 


In  August,  1810,  a  combination  of  circum- 
stances wholly  providential,  being  unsought  and 
unexpected  by  all  concerned,  led  the  third  Asso- 
ciate Reformed  Church  in  the  city  of  New- 
York,  then  recently  formed  under  the  minis- 
try of  Dr.  John  M.  Mason,  to  hold  their  as- 
semblies in  the  house  belonging  to  the  church 
under  the  pastoral  care  of  Dr.  John  B.  Ro- 
me yn,  a  minister  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  North  America.  As  the 
hours  of  service  were  different,  the  one  congre- 
gation sitcceeding  the  other  in  the  same  place  on 
the  same  day,  the  first  effect  of  this  arrangement 
was  a  partial  amalgamation  of  the  two  societies 
in  the  ordinary  exercises  of  public  worship — 
the  next,  a  mutual  esteem  growing  out  of  mutual 
acquaintance  with  each  other,  as  united  in  the 
same  precious  faith ;  and,  finally,  after  a  very 
short  time,  invitations  on  both  sides  to  join  in 
commemorating,  at  his  own  table,  the  love  of 


2 

that  Saviour  who  gave  himself  for  them,  an  offer- 
ing and  a  sacrifice  to  God  of  a  sweet  smelling 
savour.  The  invitations  were  as  cordially  ac- 
cepted as  they  were  frankly  given.  The  bulk  of 
the  members  of  both  churches,  as  well  as  some 
belonging  to  correlate  churches,  mingled  their 
affections  and  their  testimony  in  the  holy  or- 
dinance. The  ministers  reciprocated  the  services 
of  the  sacramental  day ;  and  the  communion, 
thus  established,  has  been  perpetuated  with  in- 
creasing delight  and  attachment,  and  has  extend- 
ed itself  to  ministers  and  private  christians  of 
other  churches. 

Such  an  event,  it  is  believed,  had  never  before 
occurred  in  the  United  States.  The  Presbyterian 
Church  in  North  America  sprang  immediately 
from  the  established  church  of  Scotland.  The 
Associate  Reformed  Church,  Presbyterian  also, 
was  founded  in  the  union  of  ministers  and  peo- 
ple from  the  two  branches  of  the  Secession  in 
Scotland,  and  from  the  Reformed  Presbytery. 

When  they  emigrated  to  this  countiy,  it  was 
not  to  be  expected  that  the  esprit  du  corpsy  their 
characteristic  feelings,  should  perish  in  the  At- 
lantic. All  experience  justifies  the  poet's  re- 
mark, 

Ccclum  non  animum  mutant  qui  trans  mare  currunt  ■ 


and  accordingly,  like  the  mother-churches,  they 
maintained  not  only  separate  communions,  but 
much  of  the  old  reserve  and  distance. 

Portions  of  two  denominations  thus  situated, 
laying  aside  their  party  distinctions,  coming  to- 
gether on  the  broad  ground  of  one  body,  one 
spirit,  one  hope,  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  bap- 
tism, one  "  God  and  Father  of  all,"  and  em- 
bracing each  other  in  the  most  sacred  and  tender 
offices  of  Christian  fellowship,  presented  a  scene 
of  no  common  or  feeble  interest.  Its  very  no- 
velty roused  attention  ;  and  gave  birth  to  specu- 
lations various  as  the  temper,  character,  and  con- 
dition of  their  authors.  Rumour,  with  her  "  hun- 
dred tongues,"  was  active,  as  usual,  in  bespeak- 
ing the  public  ear.  Intelligence,  announcing 
the  tmth,  and  more  than  the  truth,  but  yet  not 
the  whole  truth  :  and  accompanied,  occasionally, 
by  surmises  and  comments  ill  calculated  to  make 
a  favourable  impression,  was  forwarded,  with  in- 
dustrious celerity,  to  distant  parts  of  the  land. 

The  Associate  Reformed  Church,  generally 
speaking,  had  been  strict,  and  even  exclusive,  in 
her  communion.  The  jealousy  naturally  enter- 
tained by  her  toward  the  General  Assembly,  was, 
to  say  the  least,  not  diminished  by  the  collisions 
which  had  taken  place  between  many  of  their 
members,  especially  in  the  western  and  southern 


4 

parts  of  the  United  States.  All  things,  therefore, 
considered,  we  are  not  to  wonder  that  the  report 
of  what  happened  at  New- York  was  received,  by 
verj  many,  with  dislike  and  alarm.  This  effect 
is  so  perfectly  analogous  to  the  laws  which  govern 
feehng  in  masses  of  men,  that  it  could  not  have 
been  hindered  but  by  a  miracle,  or  something 
very  like  a  miracle.  They  are  startled  by  nothing 
so  soon  as  by  encroachment  upon  their  habits  : 
and  will  rather  permit  their  understanding  to  be 
unfiuitful,  than  the  routine  of  their  thoughts  and 
conduct  to  be  broken  up.  Let  us  not  complain 
of  this  propensity,  although  it  may  be,  and  often 
is,  indulged  too  far.  It  is  a  wise  provision  in  the 
economy  of  human  nature,  without  which  there 
would  be  neither  stability,  order,  nor  comfort. 
Remove  it,  and  the  past  would  furnish  no  lessons 
for  the  future :  Intellect  would  be  wasted  on  pre- 
mises without  conclusions,  and  life  on  experi- 
ments without  results.  Therefore  no  principle  is 
more  firmly  established  in  the  minds  of  all  who 
think  correctly  and  act  discreetly,  than  this — 
that  ivanton  invasion  of  social  habits  is  of  the  es- 
sence of  folly.  Yet  there  is  an  extreme'  of  cau- 
tion as  reprehensible  and  hurtful  as  the  extreme 
of  rashness.  Till  human  opinions  become  in- 
fallible, the  practices  which  grow  out  of  them 
cannot  be  always  right.     In  many  cases,  as  every 


party  acknowledges  of  every  other,  they  are  de- 
cidedly wrong.     It  is  thus  settled  by  common 
consent,  and  for  the  best  of  reasons,  that  what- 
ever be  the  courtesy  due  to  public  habit,  we  are 
not  to  bow  before  it  with  superstitious  reverence. 
We  should  treat  it  as  we  are  to  treat  our  civil 
rulers,  with  unfeigned  respect,  but  with  a  reserve 
for  the  obligation  to  obey  God  rather  than  man. 
At  no  time,  and  upon  no  pretence,  must  it  be 
allowed  to  usurp  the  right  of  controling  con- 
science in  matters  of  scriptural  principle ;  nor  to 
exert  the  pestilent  prerogative  of  abetting  the 
cause  of  errour  by  arresting  the  progress  of  inqui- 
ry after  truth.     Unless  we  accede  to  this  propo- 
sition, the  rock  is  swept  away  from  under  our 
feet.     The  doctrine  of  Reformation  is  the  worst 
of  heresies ;  and  every  attempt  to  enforce  it  a 
profligate  insurrection    against    human    peace. 
"  Thou  that  teachest  another,  teachest  thou  not 
thyself  ?"     When  there  exist  serious  doubts,  and 
those  not  hastily  admitted,  whether  certain  prac- 
tical opinions,  i.  e.  opinions  which  influence  habit, 
among  Christians,  are  really  serviceable  or  inju- 
*rious  to  the  interests  of  pure  Christianity,  an  op- 
portunity of  bringing  their  propriety  to  the  test, 
instead  of  being  lamented  as  an  affliction,  should 
be  welcomed  as  a  benefit.     Such  doubts  have 
been  long  entertained,  and,  as  it  is  conceived, 


upon  no  slight  grounds.,  not  concerning  the  avoiv- 
ed  doctrine  of  the  Associate  Reformed  Church, 
respecting  Christian  communion,  but  concerning 
her  almost  invariable  practice  on  that  point.  It 
has  been,  it  is  at  this  moment,  more  than  doubt- 
ed, whether  the  rigour  of  her  restrictive  commu- 
nion corresponds  with  the  genius  of  the  gospel ; 
with  the  best  spirit  of  the  best  churches  in  the 
best  of  times  ;  or  with  her  own  professed  princi- 
ples. The  writer  of  these  pages  confesses  that 
such  has  been  long  the  state  of  his  own  mind. 
Considerations  of  public  delicacy,  induced  him, 
for  a  number  of  years,  not  merely  to  abstain 
from  the  use  of  his  liberty,  but  to  forego  what  he 
accounted  a  high  evangelical  privilege  ;  and  to 
submit  to  these  sacrifices  under  the  painful  ap- 
prehension, at  lekst  on  some  occasions,  that  he 
might  be  found  to  have  lent  himself  to  mere 
party  passions,  when  he  ought  to  have  immolated 
them  on  the  altar  of  love  to  Jesus  Christ,  in  ex- 
pressions of  love  which  he  was  compelled  to 
deny  even  to  those  who  bore  the  image  of  Christ.* 


*  One  of  those  occasions  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  forget.  He 
had  been  distributing  tokens  of  admission  to  the  Lord's  supper.  Af- 
ter the  congregation  had  retired,  he  perceived  a  young  woman  at  the 
lower  end  of  an  aisle  reclining  on  a  pew  in  a  pensive  attitude.  As  he 
approached  her,  she  said,  "  Sir,  I  am  afraid  I  have  done  wrong?" 
Wliy,  what  have  you  done  ?     "I  went  up  with  the  communicants,  and 


He  has  not  been  alone  in  this  embarrassment. 
And  he  is  far  from  regretting  an  event  which  led 
him  and  others  of  his  brethren  to  an  exchange  of 
communion  most  consonant,  as  they  believe,  to 
the  divine  word,  and  to  the  very  letter  and  spirit 
of  that  form  of  sound  doctrine  which,  in  the 
most  solemn  moment  of  their  lives,  under  the 
oath  of  God  in  their  ordination-vows,  they  bound 
themselves  to  maintain  and  to  apply.  He  can- 
not regret  such  an  event,  because  it  invites  a  free 


received  a  token,  but  am  not  a  member  of  your  church  ;  and  I  could 
not  be  at  rest  till  I  spoke  to  you  about  it."     To  what  church  do  you 
belong  ?     "  To  the  Dutch  church  :  and,  if  you  wish  it,  I  can  satisfy 
you  of  my  character  and  standing  there."     But  what  made  you  come 
for  a  token  without  mentioning  the  matter  before  ?     "  1  had  not 
an  opportunity,    as   I  did  not  know  in  time  that  your  communion 
was  to  be  next  Lord's  day.     I  am  sorry  if  I  have  done  Avrong  :  but  1 
expect  to  leave  the  city  on  Tuesday  ;  and  to  be  absent,  I  cannot  tell 
how  long,  in  a  part  of  the  country  where  I  shall  have  no  opportunity 
of  communing  ;  and  I  wished,  once  more  before  I  went  away,  to  join 
with  Christians  in  showing  forth  my  Saviour's  death."     He  consulted 
a  moment  with  the  church-officers  who  were  still  present ;  and  it  was 
thought  most  expedient  not  to  grant  her  request.     He  communicated 
this  answer  as  gently  as  possible  to  the  modest  petitioner.  She  said  not 
another  word  ;  but  with  one  hand  giving  back  the  token,  and  with  the 
other  putting  up  her  kerchief  to   her  eyes,  she  turned  away,  strug- 
gling with  her  anguish,  and  the  tears  streaming  down  her  cheeks.  How 
did  his  heart  smite  him  !     He  went  home  exclaiming  to  himself,  "  Can 
this  be  right?     Is  it  possible  that  such  is  the  law  of  the  Redeem- 
er's house  ?"     It  quickened  his  inquiries  ;  his  inquiries  strengthened 
his  doubts ;  and  have  terminated  in  the  conviction  that  it  was  altoge- 
ther wrong. 

2 


8 

discussion,  and  may  conduct  to  a  comfortable 
decision,  of  the  great  question  concerning  ''  the 
communion  of  saints."  With  this  view  he  soh- 
cits  calm  and  candid  attention,  while  he  endea- 
vours to  trace,  w^ithout  disguise,  the  general 
course  of  those  reflections  and  reasonings  of 
which  the  result  has  created  so  much  public 
agitation. 


PART  I. 

The  Scriptural  Doctrine* 

Strange  as  it  may  appear,  it  is  nevertheless 
true,  that  men  who  have  the  bible  in  their  hands 
as  their  only  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  appeal 
immediately  to  its  testimony,  for  their  justification , 
but  very  rarely  for  their  information.  They  take 
for  granted  that  their  peculiarities  are  right,  and 
that  the  only  use  of  the  scripture  is  to  prove  them. 
Much  is  gained  when,  instead  of  putting  their 
language  into  the  mouth  of  the  book  of  God,  the 
book  of  God  is  allowed  to  sit  in  judgment  upon 
themselves,  and  to  pronounce  its  own  verdict. 
This  is  that  course  of  truth  which,  however  feebly, 
we  shall  endeavour  to  follow.  So  that  our  leading 
inquiry  contemplates  the  direct  doctrine  of  the 
scripture  concerning  Christian  fellowship. 

We  must  go  to  first  principles: 

There  is  no  point  more  fully  settled  in  the 
scriptures,  than  this,  that 

The  Church  of  God  is  one. 

It  were  endless  to  collect  all  the  proofs.  Let  one 
suffice.  Paul,  or  rather  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
spake  by  his  mouth  and  wrote  with  his  pen, 


10 

has  thus  represented  it.  As  the  body  is  one,  and 
hath  many  memhers;  and  all  the  memhers  of  that 
one  body,  beiiig  many,  are  one  body  ;  so  also  is 
Christ.  For  by  one  Spirit  are  we  all  baptized 
into  ONE  body,  ivhether  we  be  Jews  or  Gentiles, 
luhether  we  be  bond  or  free ;  and  have  been  all 
7nade  to  drink  into  one  Spirit.  For  the  body  is 
not  ONE  member,  but  many.*  This  analogy 
between  man's  natural  body  and  the  spiritual 
body  of  Christ,  which  he  elsewhere  declares  to 
be  the  church,!  Paul  presses  at  great  length,  and 
with  unusual  minutdttef  s.  He  does  it,  as  any  one 
who  shall  seriously  peruse  the  context  may  see, 
with  the  design  of  reproving,  and,  if  possible, 
destroying  that  vain  glorious  temper  which  had 
infected  the  Corinthian  converts;  each  one  arro- 
gating to  himself,  or  to  that  class  with  which  his 
gifts  more  immediately  connected  him,  a  peculiar 
pre-eminence  and  sanctity ;  as  if  he  and  his  asso- 
ciates were  the  special  favourites  of  God,  and 
enjoyed  so  exclusively  the  nobler  ministrations  of 
the  Spirit,  as  to  justify  their  contempt  of  others 
whom  they  thought  to  be  less  distinguished. 
In  order  to  demonstrate  the  unreasonableness 
and  unrighteousness  of  such  conduct,  he   lays 


*  1  Cor.  xii.  12—14.  t  Eph.  i.  22, 23.  iii.  16.  iv.  3— IS. 


11 

down  certain  indisputable  principles  concerning 
the  natural  body ;  ex.  gr. 

1.  That  the  multitude  of  its  members  does  not 
destroy  its  unity,  nor  their  relation  to  it  as  a  whole 
— all  the  members  of  that  one  body,  being  many,  are 
ONE  body:  v.  12. 

2.  That  their  union  with  the  body  is  the  founda- 
tion of  all  the  value,  beauty,  and  excellence,  of  the 
members  in  their  respective  places,  v.  15 — ^24. 

S.  That  the  efficiency  of  the  members  consists 
in  their  mutual  co-operation  as  parts  of  a  common 
whole — that  there  should  be  no  schism  in  the  body, 
V.  25. 

4.  That  from  their  union  with  the  body,  there 
results,  by  a  divine  constitution,  a  communion  of 
interests ;  a  sympathy  of  feeling,  and  a  reciproca- 
tion of  benefits — that  the  members  should  have  the 
same  care  one  for  another:  And  whether  one  mem- 
ber suffer^  all  the  members  suffer  with  it;  or  one 
member  be  honoured^  all  the  members  rejoice  with  it, 
V.  25,  26. 

The  use  of  this  similitude  Paul  declares  to  be 
an  illustration  of  the  unity  of  the  church,  and  of 
the  intimate  communion  of  believers.  Noiv  ye  are 
the  body  of  Christy  and  members  in  particular,  v.  27. 

It  is  true  that  the  Apostle  turns  his  argument 
directly  against  the  contentions  in  the  Corinthian 
church  'about  the  superiority,  or  inferiority,  of 


12 

public  offices  and  spiritual  gifts.  And  God  hath  set 
some  in  the  church;  first y apostles ^  secondarily ^ pro- 
phets^ ^c.  V  28 — 30.  But  it  is  also  true  that  the 
principles  of  his  argument  are  general*,  are  equally 
applicable  to  every  thing  which  tends  to  cherish 
among  Christians  a  party  feelings  at  the  expense 
of  weakening  the  sense  of  their  union,  or  of  inter- 
rupting their  communion,  as  members  of  the  body 
of  Christ ;  and  were  intended  to  be  so  applied : 
For, 

They  are  part  of  the  Apostle's  remonstrance 
against  the  schismatic  spirit  which  had  split  up 
the  church  of  Corinth  into  a  number  of  factions : 
one  crying,  "  I  am  of  Paul ;"  another,  "  I  am  of 
Apollos;"  another,  "  I  am  of  Cephas ;"  and  ano- 
ther, more  proud  and  boasting  more  purity  than 
any  of  the  rest,  "  I  am  of  Christ."  Scandalous, 
however,  as  their  schisms  were,  they  bad  not 
proceeded  to  separation,  nor  did  they  dream  of 
breaking  communion.  If  the  Apostle  so  sternly 
reprehended  their  divisions  as  inconsistent  with 
the  unity  of  the  church,  although  they  continued 
to  hold  communion  together,  what  would  he  have 
said,  how  would  he  have  thundered  forth  his  in- 
dignant rebuke  had  they  carried  their  contests 
so  far  as  to  burst  the  bonds  of  communion,  and, 
by  that  fact,  virtually  to  disown  each  other  as 
members  of  the  body  of  Christ? 


13 

Moreover,  the  Apostle  has  himself  extended 
his  argiinient  to  matters  which,  without  affecting 
the  substance  of  our  faith,  hope,  or  dutj,  do  yet 
produce  great  diversity  of  opinion  and  habit: 
and  has  shown  that  they  ought  not  to  infringe 
upon  Christian  union  ;  nor,  consequently,  upon  the 
expression  of  it  in  Christian  communion.  Be- 
tween the  freeman  and  the  slave,  between  the 
barbarian  and  the  Greek,  between  the  Gentile 
and  the  Jew,  there  existed  wide  differences  of 
condition  and  feeling,  and  large  sources  of  ani- 
mosity. But,  saith  Paul,  they  must  all  yield  to 
the  force,  they  must  all  bow  before  the  majesty, 
of  this  consideration; — ^that  the  Christian  freeman 
and  slave — tl>e  Christian  barbarian  and  Greek — 
the  Christian  Gentile  and  Jew,  have  "  hy  one 
Spirit  been  all  baptized  into  one  bodij.^^  What  is  this 
but  to  say,  that  the  union  of  behevers  with  each 
other  as  members  of  the  body  of  Christ,  is  more 
precious  than  any  other  union,  civil,  national,  or 
ecclesiastical?  and  will  always  outweigh,  in  the 
balance  of  God's  judgment,  the  heaviest  pleas 
which  can  be  accumulated  for  recognising  any 
other  in  preference  to  it;  or  for  not  recognising 
it  in  preference  to  every  other  ? 

Finally.  The  Apostle  opposes  the  spirit  of 
ecclesiastical  faction  to  the  spirit  of  Christian 


14 

love.*  This  heavenly  grace  he  exalts  above 
prophecies,  tongues,  knowledge,  the  faith  of 
miracles,  the  most  magnificent  alms,  the  very 
zeal  of  martyrdom !  Now  this  love,  the  only  cure 
for  the  gangrene  of  party  strife — the  most  cha- 
racteristic feature  of  Christ's  image  in  a  renewed 
man — the  most  precious  fruit  of  his  grace ;  and 
yet  the  fruit  which  the  bulk  of  his  professed  fol- 
lowers seem  to  think  themselves  under  hardly 
any  obligations  to  cultivate — this  love  is  declared 
to  originate  in  the  love  of  God  shed  abroad  in  the 
heart;  and  to  be  drawn  out  toAvard  the  brethren 
precisely  on  this  account,  that  they  are  the 
children  of  God — ^the  disciples  of  Christ — and 
therefore  not  on  account  of  their  adherence  to 
one  or  another  denomination,  however  sound  it 
may  be  in  the  faith.  Hereby^  said  the  master, 
hereby  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples^ 
if  ye  have  love  one  to  another.^  Every  one^ 
adds  the  beloved  John  who  lay  in  his  bosom 
and  drank  deeply  into  his  spirit,  every  one  that 
loveth  him  that  begat ^  loveth  him  also  that  is  begot- 
ten of  him^X  And  surely  the  description  which 
Paul  has  given  of  Christian  love,  in  the  chapter 
before  us,  corresponds  to  any  thing  else  as  well 


*  1  Cor.  rill.  t  John  xiii.  35,  %  1  Jobn  v.  1. 


16 

as  to  that  gloomy  distance  and  sour  disdain,  which 
are  cherished  by  some  professors  towards  others 
of  whose  graces  the  Hght  is  at  least  equal  to  their 
own;  and  which^  by  a  hardihood  not  easily 
attained  or  equalled,  are  converted  into  a  testi- 
mony for  Jesus  Christ ! 

Since,  therefore,  the  Apostle  has  resembled 
the  unity  of  the  Christian  church  and  the  union 
of  Christians,  to  the  unity  of  the  human  body  and 
the  union  of  its  members ;  and  since  the  use  of 
this  similitude  in  his  expostulation  with  the  Co- 
rinthian schismatics  was  only  a  special  applica- 
tion of  a  doctrine  general  in  itself,  and  applicable 
every  where  and  always  to  feuds  and  divisions 
among  those  who  embrace  substantially  the  same 
faith,  let  us,  in  few  words,  gather  up  its  results, 
and  see  how  they  bear  upon  the  subject  of  sacra- 
mental communion. 

1.  The  body  of  Christ  is  one. 

2.  Every  member  of  this  body  has,  by  a  divine 
constitution,  utterly  independent  on  his  own  will, 
both  union  and  communion  with  every  other 
member,  as  infalUbly  as  hands  and  feet,  eyes, 
ears,  and  nose,  are,  by  the  very  constitution  of 
the  physical  body,  united  together  as  parts  of  a 
whole,  and  sympathise  with  each  other  accord- 
ingly. 

3 


IB 

5.  The  members  of  this  body  of  Christ  have 
a  common  and  unalienable  interest  in  all  the 
provision  which  God  has  made  for  its  nutriment, 
growth,  and  consolation;  and  that  simply  and 
absolutely,  because  they  are  members  of  that 
body.   Therefore, 

4.  The  members  of  the  church  of  Christ,  indi- 
vidually   and   collectively,   are   under   a  moral 
necessity,  i.  e.  under  the  obligation  of  God's  au- 
thority, to  recognise  each  other's  character  and 
privileges ;  and,  consequently,  not  to  deny  the 
tokens  of  such  recognition.     Sacramental  com- 
munion is  one  of  those  tokens:   therefore,  the 
members  of  the  church  of  Christ,  as  such,  are 
under  the  obligation  of  God's  authority  to  recog- 
nise their  relation  to  Christ  and  to  each  other, 
by  joining  together  in  sacramental  communion. 
Nor  has  any  church  upon  earth  the  power  to  re- 
fuse a  seat  at  the  table  of  the  Lord  to  one  whose 
"  conversation  is  as  becometh  the  gospel."     If 
she  has,   she  has  derived  it  from  some  other 
quarter  than  her  master's  grant:  and  founds  the 
privilege  of  communion  with  her  in  something 
else   than  a  person's  "  having  received   Christ 
Jesus  the  Lord,  and  walking  in  him."     Let  her 
look  to  herself,  and  see  what  account  she  shall 
bn  able  to  render  of  her  usurpation. 


17 

This  general  conclusion,  flowing  irrefragably 
from  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  Christ's 
body  and  the  union  and  communion  of  its  mem- 
bers, is  illustrated  and  confirmed  by  a  considera- 
tion of  the  tenure  by  which  all  Christian  churches 
and  people  hold  their  Christian  privileges. 

None  whom  these  pages  address  will  pretend 
that  there  are  no  true  Christians  in  the  world  but 
themselves,  and  no  true  churches  but  their  own — 
that  all  other  professors  are  mere  heathen ;  and  all 
their  churches,  synagogues  of  Satan.  The  very 
idea  of  such  arrogance  is  abhorred  by  those  whose 
feelings  and  practice  are  most  adverse  to  free 
communion.  They  profess  to  acknow]e<^ge  and 
honour  other  churches — ^to  rejoice  in  the  gifts  and 
graces  of  other  Christians — to  account  them  "  as 
dear  children"  of  God ;  as  "  brethren  beloved" 
in  their  common  Redeemer:  nor  is  there  any 
reason  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  such  professions. 
This  is  all  right — Christian-like — ^just  as  it  should 
be.  But  does  it  never  appear  to  these  good  men 
somewhat  incongruous  to  decline  taking  a  family- 
meal  with  any  of  the  household  of  faith  who  do 
not  happen  to  occupy  the  same  apartment  Avith 
themselves?  to  own  them  as  "saints,"  and  "pre- 
cious" saints  ;  and  yet  deny  them  the  provision 
which  belongs  to  the  saints  ?  And  dt  the  moment 
©f  greeting  them  a3  brethren,  Moved  brethren,  to 


18 

tell  them,  "  jou  shall  not  have,  at  the  table  where 
we  sup,  one  crumb  of  the  bread,  nor  one  drop  of 
the  wme  which  Jesus,  both  your  Lord  and  ours, 
has  given  to  you  as  well  as  to  us  ?"  This  is  cer- 
tainly an  original  way  of  expressing  love ! 

But,  to  press  the  matter  a  little  closer.  These 
true  churches  and  Christians  have  a  right  to  the 
holy  sacraments,  or  they  have  not.  If  not,  it  is  a 
contradiction  to  call  them  true  churches:  the 
rightful  possession  of  the  sacraments  being  essen- 
tial to  the  existence  of  a  true  church.  They  have 
then  such  a  right.  How  did  they  obtain  it  ?  By  a 
grant  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  unquestionably. 
He  gave  all  church-privileges  to  his  church 
catholic ;  and  from  this  catholic  grant  do  all  par- 
ticular churches  derive  their  right  to,  and  their 
property  in  whatever  privileges  they  enjoy.* 
Other  true  churches,  then,  hold  their  right  to  all 
church  privileges  by  the  very  same  tenure  by 
which  we  hold  ours:  and,  consequently,  the 
members  of  those  churches  have  the  very  same 
right  to  the  table  of  the  Lord  as  the  members  of 
our  own.  By  what  authority,  therefore,  does 
any  particular  church  undertake  to  invalidate  a 
right  bestpw^ed  by  Christ  himself?  And  what  less, 


*  See  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Failh^  ch.  xv.  and  Form  of 
Church  gov ernmeni,  at  the  beginning ;  with  the  scriptural  proofs. 


19 

or  what  else,  does  she  attempt,  when  she  refuses 
to  admit  Christians  from  other  particular  churches 
to  the  participation  of  any  ordinance  which  Christ 
has  estabhshed  for  their  common  use?  The 
sacramental  table  is  spread.  I  approach  and  ask 
for  a  seat.  You  say,  "  No."  "  Do  you  dispute  my 
Christian  character  and  standing."  "  Not  in  the 
least."  "  Why,  then,  am  I  refused  ?"  "  You  do 
not  belong  to  our  church."  "  Your  church !  what 
do  you  mean  by  your  church  ?  Is  it  any  thing 
more  than  a  branch  of  Cfmsfs  church  ?  Whose 
table  is  this  ?  Is  it  the  Lord^s  table,  or  yours  ?  If 
yours  and  not  his,  I  have  done.  But  if  it  is  the 
Lord^s,  where  did  you  acquire  the  power  of  shut- 
ting out  from  its  mercies  any  one  of  his  people  ? 
I  claim  my  seat  under  my  master's  grant.  Show 
me  your  warrant  for  interfering  with  it." 

Methinks  it  should  require  a  stout  heart  to  en- 
counter such  a  challenge :  and  that  the  sturdiest 
sectarian  upon  earth,  not  destitute  of  the  fear  of 
God,  should  pause  and  tremble  before  he  ventured 
upon  a  final  repulse.  The  language  of  such  an 
act  is  very  clear  and  daring.  "  You  have,  indeed, 
Christ's  invitation  to  his  table  ;  but  you  have  not 
mine.  And  without  minCy  his  shall  not  avail." 
Most  fearful !  Christ  Jesus  says,  do  this  in  remeni' 
branee  of  me.  His  servants  rise  to  obey  his  com- 
mand; m\d  a  fellow  servant,  acting  in  the  name 


20 

of  that  Christ  Jesus,  under  the  oath  of  God,  in- 
terposes his  veto,  and  says — "  You  shall  not." 
Whose  soul  does  not  shrink  and  shudder ! 

Place  the  subject  in  another  light.  Is  it,  or  is  it 
not  the  duty  of  Christians  in  all  true  churches  to 
show  forth  the  Lord's  death  in  the  sacrament  of 
the  supper  ?  If  not,  then  we  have  true  churches 
and  Christians  under  no  obligation  to  observe  the 
most  characteristic  and  discriminating  of  the 
Christian  ordinances.  Here,  again,  is  a  contra- 
diction nearly  in  terms.  For  who  can  acknow- 
ledge a  true  church  without  sacraments  ?  If  it  is— - 
if  it  would  be  a  great  corruption,  a  grievous  sin 
in  those  churches  to  expel  or  neglect  their  sa- 
craments, and  consign  the  memorial  of  their 
Saviour's  love  to  utter  oblivion,  it  may  be  further 
asked — whether,  in  acquitting  themselves  of  their 
duty,  they  perform  an  acceptable  service  unto 
God  or  not?  If  they  may,  and  do;  and  that  with 
the  most  evident  tokens  of  their  master's  appro- 
bation, as  no  sober  Christian  will  deny,  how 
should  an  act  of  communion  in  "  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord,"  be  lawful  and  commanded 
to  a  person  in  one  true  church,  and  be  unlawful 
and  forbidden  to  that  same  person  in  another  ? 
How  should  two  persons  both  honour  the  Re- 
deemer by  communicating  in  their  respective 
churches,  and  both  dishenvur  him  by  the  very 


21 

same  thing,  if  they  should  happen  to  exchange 
places  ?  On  what  principle  of  tnith  or  consist- 
ency can  any  man  ascribe  to  a  subdivision  of 
God's  church,  the  privilege  of  controlling  the 
general  laws  by  which  the  whole  is  to  be  govern- 
ed, and  the  more  than  magic  virtue  of  transmu- 
ting the  character  of  individuals  and  of  their  wor- 
ship, by  the  mere  fact  of  their  belonging  or  not 
belonging  to  such  subdivision?  So  that  the  ques- 
tion of  their  honouring  the  table  of  the  Lord,  or 
their  profaning  and  polluting  it,  shall  turn  precise- 
ly on  this  point,  Whether  they  are  members  of 
that  particular  church  or  not  ?  Hence  emerges  a 
dilemma  from  which  the  brethren  we  have  to 
contend  with  will  find  it  difficult  to  make  their 
escape.  You  must  either  avow  or  disavow  the 
doctrine  which  has  just  been  imputed  to  your 
practice.  Take  your  choice.  If  you  avow  it,  you 
stand  self-convicted  of  corrupting  to  their  core  the 
institutions  of  your  master.  If  you  disavow  it, 
why  do  you  demand  more  than  the  evidence  of 
Christian  character  as  a  qualification  to  commu- 
nion with  you?  On  this  side  of  the  dilemma  you 
stand  self-convicted  of  repeUing,  without  reason, 
your  Christian  brethren  from  the  table  of  the 
Lord.  Either  way,  your  condemnation  proceeds 
out  of  your  own  mouth. 

If  any  thing  be  wanting  to  this  general  argii- 


22 
« 

ment,  let  us  inquire  at  the  Chistian  sacraments. 
They  are  admitted,  by  all  Protestants,  to  be  but 
two,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper.  What  is 
their  nature  ?  "What  their  use  ?  And  to  whom 
are  they  to  be  administered  ?  We  may  take  our 
answer  from  an  authority  unquestioned  by  the 
parties  to  this  discussion, 

"  Sacraments  are  holy  signs  and  seals  of  the 
covenant  of  grace,  immediately  instituted  by 
God,  to  represent  Christ  and  his  benefits ;  and  to 
confirm  our  interest  in  him :  as  also  to  put  a  visi- 
ble difference  between  those  that  belons;  unto 
the  church,  and  the  rest  of  the  world;  and 
solemnly  to  engage  them  to  the  service  of  Christ, 
according  to  his  word."* 

Assuming  this  account  of  the  sacraments  to  b© 
scriptural,  they  are  clearly  the  common  property 
of  all  Christians  under  the  whole  heaven. 

1.  "  They  are  signs  and  seals  of  the  covenant 
of  grace."  Now,  all  believers,  in  all  places  of 
Christ's  kingdom  upon  earth,  have  their  share  in 
the  mercies  of  that  covenant :  therefore,  all  be- 
lievers, having  the  thing  signified,  have  a  perfect 
right  to  the  sign, 

2.  They  "  represent  Christ  and  his  benefits,  and 
confirm  an  interest  in  him."     Therefore,  all  be- 

*  Conussion  of  Faiih,  eh,  xxviii. 


25 

lievers,  being  partakers  of  Christ  and  his  benefits ; 
in  other  words,  having  an  interest  in  him,  are  the 
proper  recipients  of  those  ordinances  whose  use 
is  to  "  confirm"  that  interest  to  their  faith. 

3. "  They  put  a  visible  difference  between  those 
that  belong  to  the  church  and  the  rest  of  the 
world."  Therefore,  they  who  belong  unto  the 
church  of  God,  who  are  known  and  recognised  as 
Christians,  have  a  right  to  this  badge  of  discrimi- 
nation, and  are  bound  to  put  it  on  and  wear  it,  as 
they  shall  have  opportunity,  in  whatever  part  of 
God's  church  they  may  happen  to  be.  Conse- 
quently, they  who  so  narrow  the  use  of  this  badge, 
as  to  make  it  distinguish  not  merely  the  church 
from  the  world;  the  follower  from  the  foe  of 
Christ  Jesus  ;  but  the  church  from  the  church, 
the  follower  from  the  follower,  the  friend  from  the 
friend  of  Christ  Jesus ;  and  thus  to  exhibit  them  as 
having  separate  Christian  interests,  cormpt — not 
the  form  and  circumstances — but  the  matter, 
but  the  substance,  of  the  holy  sacraments. 

4.  They  "  solemnly  engage  behevers  to  the 
service  of  Christ  according  to  his  word."  There- 
fore all  who  have  entered  into  his  service,  and 
mean  to  regulate  their  lives  by  his  word — and 
what  Christian  does  not? — have  a  ris-ht  to  the 
sacramental  encouragement,  commensurate  with 
the  sacramental  oath.    Which  of  them  can  inno- 


24 

cently  retuse  the  oath?  To  which  of  them  may 
the  encouragement  be  innocently  denied  ?  And 
who  art  thou,  sinful  flesh,  escaped  by  thy  master's 
o;race  from  the  damnation  of  hell,  that  darest — 
jes — BAREST,  to  keep  back  from  the  vow  and  the 
consolations  of  thy  masters  table  any  whom  thou 
acknowledgest  to  be  the  objects  of  his  love  ? 
It  results, 

1.  That  they  who  have  a  right  to  sacramental 
communion  any  where,  have  a  right  to  it  every 
where ;  and,  conversely,  that  they  who  have  not 
a  right  to  it  every  where,  have  a  right  to  it  no 
where. 

2.  That  no  qualification  for  such  communion 
may,  by  the  law  of  Christ,  be  exacted  from  any 
individual  other  than  visible  Christianity;  i.  e. 
a  profession  and  practice  becoming  the  gospel, 
without  regard  to  those  sectarian  ditferences 
which  consist  with  the  substance  of  evangelical 
truth. 


PART  II. 

Facts. 

In  questions  concerning  social  observanceSj 
the  first  and  most  prevalent  presumption  is  in 
favour  of  those  under  which  the  existing  genera- 
tion was  born  and  educated.     What  they  have 
always  seen  before  their  own  eyes,  followed  in 
their  own  practice,  and  received  by  tradition  from 
their  fathers,  the  bulk  of  men  consider  as  having 
on  its  side  the  double  advantage  of  prescription 
and  right.     Without  exercising  much  thought  on 
the  matter,  they  have  a  sort  of  quiet  hereditary 
notion  that  it  ahvays  was  as  it  is,  and  is  as  it  ought 
to  be.  Whatever,  therefore,  has,  in  their  eye,  the 
appearance  of  novelty,  is  an  object  of  suspicion. 
New  and  false — new  and  hurtful,  are  with  them 
terms  of  equal  import.     The  conclusion  would 
be  sound  were  the  premises  correct.  In  doctrines 
of  faith  and  ordinances  of  worship  there  can  be 
no  room  for  original  discoveries.  The  divine  iiilg 
for  both  remains  as  it  was  when  the  sacred  canon 
was  closed.  If  we  date  from  that  period,  then,  in- 
deed, every  thing  new,  i.  e.  every  thing  unknown 
to  the  insph'ed  records,  if  proposed  as  an  article 


2B 

of  faith,  or  an  institution  of  worship,  is  nceessarilj 
false  and  hurtful.  Here,  novelty  and  crime  are  the 
same.  Wherefore  the  essential  merits  of  contro- 
versies upon  all  such  points  are  to  be  examined  and 
decided  by  the  scripture  alone.  And  every  deci- 
sion agreeable  to  the  scripture  takes  precedence 
of  all  others,  how  long  soever  they  may  have 
been  possessed  of  the  public  mind,  on  the  ground 
both  of  right  and  of  prescription.  Of  right,  be- 
cause it  is  the  voice  of  the  law  which  has  the 
sole  prerogative  of  binding  conscience — Of  pre- 
scription, because  God's  institutions  in  his  own 
church  must  ever  be  Jirst^  and  all  deviations  from 
them,  novelties :  absolute  novelties  in  their  com- 
mencement; and  comparative  novelties  at  the 
latest  moment  of  their  existence  afterwards.  On 
the  stiength  of  this  principle  did  the  Protestant 
Reformers  expel  the  corruptions  of  Popery, 
although  they  were  of  old  standing ;  entwined  for 
ages  with  the  habits  of  society ;  cherished  with 
unfeigned  ecclesiastical  fondness,  and  hallowed 
by  popular  devotion,  To  this  principle  we  must 
eurselves  submit — we  must  even  court  its  appli- 
cation to  our  own  observances,  if  we  hope  to  pass 
for  the  sons  of  those  who,  at  every  personal 
hazard,  and  under  every  dismaying  prospect— - 
through  fire  and  through  flood:  the  fire  of  their 
own  ''  wood,  hay,  stubbie,"  kindled  by  theii;  owa 


27 

hands;  and  the  flood  of  vengeance  poured 
around  them  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Dragon, 
bore  off  in  safety  the  gold,  the  silver,  the  precious 
stones,  of  evangelical  treasure ;  and  re-established 
on  earth,  by  the  succours  of  heaven,  the  almost 
ruined  cause  of  truth  and  grace.  Let  us,  there- 
fore, treading  in  the  steps  of  those  Christian 
heroes,  carry  our  inquiries  back  in  order  to  ascer- 
tain whether  the  catholic  communion  for  vv^hich 
these  pages  plead ;  or  the  sectional  communion, 
so  to  speak,  which  characterizes  many  Christian 
denominations,  receives  the  most  countenance 
from  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  church  of  God 
through  ages  past. 

The  facts  to  be  embraced  by  this  inquiry  may 
be  distributed  into  three  classes:  and  are  furnished 
by  the  history  of  the  church  strictly  called  Aposto- 
lical, i.  e.  as  it  existed  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles 
themselves — by  the  history  of  the  j^nmfee  church 
which  immediately  succeeded — and  by  the  his- 
tory of  the  church  as  renovated  in  the  Reformation 
from  Popery, 

1.  Facts  from  the  Apostolic  history.  For  these 
we  must  go  to  the  New  Testament  itself. 

One  of  these  facts  occurs  in  the  case  of  the 
first  converts,  who  became  such  under  the  first 
sermon  after  the  full  introduction  of  the  New 
Testament  economy.    When  the  Jews,  "  pricked 


28 

in  their  lieart^'  by  the  plain  and  pungent  preach- 
ing of  Peter,  cried  out,  "Brethren,  what  shall 
live  do?"  the  Apostle  replied,  ^'Repent  and  be 
baptized  every  one  of  you^  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins J^'*  Let  us  view  the 
bearings  of  this  transaction. 

1st.  Peter  had  quoted  a  passage  from  the  pro- 
phet Joel,  promising  salvation  to  faith  in,  and  pro- 
fession of,  the  Lord  Jesus,  v.  21.  for  thus  he  proves 
and  applies  the  sense  of  the  oracle  in  his  subse- 
quent reasoning. 

2d.  Peter  represents  this  faith  as  having  for  its 
object  Christ  crucified;  i.  e.  Christ  "  who  bore  our 
sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree ;''  the  substitute, 
the  propitiary  sacrifice  in  the  room  of  believers 
on  him.f 

3d.  Having  held  up  to  their  view  Jesus  the 
crucified,  the  Christ,  he  enjoins  on  them  a  change 
of  all  their  erroneotis  notions  concerning  his  per- 
son, his  kingdom,  and  his  work ;  and  to  receive 
the  truth  in  its  simplicity — "  Repent. "^^ 

4th.  On  the  supposition  of  such  repentance  he 
commands  them  to  "  be  baptized  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins."  They 
drank  in  this  precious  doctrine  as  the  thirsty  land 
drinks  in  the  rain  from  heaven.     They  "  gladly 

*  Acts,  Li.  14—38.  ^  1  Pet.  n.  S4.  jii.  18. 


29 

feceived  his  word ;"  and  upon  receiving  it  "  were 
baptized,'^^ 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  in  the  very  first  pre- 
cedent for  admission  to  sealing  ordinances,  and 
that  set  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  only  qualification  was  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
as  the  Saviour  of  sinners  by  the  blood  of  his  cross — 
a  faith  manifested  by  a  credible  profession  of  his 
name. 

Another  fact  occurs  in  the  case  of  the  Ethiopian 
Eunuch.  The  story  is  told  in  the  eighth  chapter  of 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Philip  the  evangelist, 
having,  by  divine  admonition,  accosted  this  dis- 
tinguished officer  as  he  was  returning  home  from 
Jerusalem,  and  been  courteously  invited  into  his 
chariot,  instmcted  him,  from  a  passage  of  Isaiah 
which  he  was  then  reading,  in  the  doctrine  of 
Jesus  the  Messiah,  and  of  the  nature  and  use  of 
the  Christian  sacraments.  The  first  is  plainly 
.asserted  in  v,  35.  and  the  second  as  plainly  im- 
plied in  i\  ^Q,  For  how  could  he  ask  such  a 
question  as,  "  See !  here  is  water — what  doth 
hinder  me  to  be  baptized  ?"  if  he  had  been  taught 
nothing  of  that  sacrament?  Philip  replied,  that 
if  he  was  a  sincere  believer  in  that  Jesus,  he 
might.  Without  delay  he  makes  the  requisite 
profession  of  his  faith,  and  is  baptized  accord- 
ingly. 


^0 

Here,  in  perfect  conformity  with  the  original 
precedent  aheady  produced,  is  a  minister  of  the 
gospel  acting  under  the  immediate  injunction  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  administering  one  of  the  seaUng 
ordinances  to  a  new  disciple  upon  no  other  terms 
than  a  credible  profession  of  faith  in  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

A  third  fact  occurs  in  the  history  of  Saul ;  Acts, 
ix.   That  furious  persecutor,  having  been  miracu- 
lously arrested  on  his  journey  to  Damascus  in 
quest  of  the  blood  of  the  saints ;  and  undergone, 
during  the  three  days  of  his  blindness  and  fasting, 
such  discipline  and  instruction  from  the  Lord 
Jesus  himself,  as  both  changed  his  heart  and 
qualified  him  for  the  Apostleship,  was  admitted 
forthwith  to  the  sacrament  of  baptism.     Upon 
what  ground?    Simply  on  the  ground  of  his  be- 
longing to  Christ,  For  on  this  ground  Christ  him- 
self placed  it.  He  is  a  chosen  vessel  unto  me^  saith 
the  Redeemer.     That  the  knowledge  of  this  fact 
was  communicated  hy  revelation  to  Ananias,  is  of 
no  weight  in  the  present  argument.    For  the  ques- 
tion is  not,  "  Hoio  are  we  to  ascertain  a  man's 
Christianity  ?"  But  w  hether,  on  the  supposition  of 
its  being  ascertained,  (which  is  always  supposed 
when  we  admit  its  existence,)  it  is,  in  and  of  itself ^ 
a  sufficient  title  to  gospel  ordinances  in  whatever 
part  of  the  church  catholic  they  may  happen  to 


31 

be  dispensed  ?  If  it  is  not — if  any  thing  more 
than  the  evidence  of  Christian  character  be  re- 
quisite to  create  both  the  right  and  the  obhgation 
to  reciprocal  communion,  it  is  clear  that  an  im- 
mediate revelation  from  God  certifying  such  a 
character,  would  not  form  a  valid  claim  to  com- 
munion. The  Apostle  elect  of  the  Gentiles  should 
have  gone  unbaptized ! 

A  fourth  fact  occurs  in  the  case  of  Cornelius, 
the  first  Gentile  admitted  into  the  Christian 
church.  All  the  circumstances  of  his  reception 
are  too  minutely  related  in  the  tenth  chapter  of 
the  Acts,  and  are  too  familiar  to  every  serious 
reader,  to  allow  of  repetition  in  this  place.  Our 
concern  is  with  the  concluding  scene. 

While  Peter  was  opening  up  the  plan  of  salva- 
tion, "the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all  them  which 
heard  the  word.  And  they  of  the  circumcision 
which  believed  were  astonished,  as  many  as 
came  with  Peter,  because  that  on  the  Gentiles 
also  was  poured  out  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
For  they  heard  them  speak  with  tongues  and 
magnify  God.  Then  answered  Peter,  Can  any 
man  forbid  water ^  that  these  should  not  he  baptized 

which  HAVE  RECEIVED  THE  HoLY  GhOST  AS  WELL 

AS  WE  ?    And  he  commanded  them  to  be  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  v.  44 — 48.  ^ 

5 


32 

This  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  visible 
proof  of  God's  acceptance;  and  the  sole  principle 
on  which  the  Aposde  pronounced  them  to  be  fit 
subjects  for  sacramental  recognition;  and  actually 
did  admit  them  to  all  the  privileges  of  the  Chris- 
tian chiirch  The  news  of  such  an  event  was  not 
slow  in  travelling.  "  The  Apostles  and  brethren 
that  were  in  Judea  heard  that  the  Gentiles  also 
had  received  the  word  of  God."*  The  account 
of  Peter^s  share  in  this  revolution  was  too  essential 
to  be  overlooked.  His  Jewish  brethren  were 
stumbled^  and  alarmed.  No  sooner  does  he  appear 
at  Jerusalem,  than  a  complaint  is  tabled  against 
him.  "  They  that  Avere  of  the  circumcision  con- 
tended with  him."  v.  2.  Well,  what  is  the  of- 
fence ?  He  had  held  corrupt  communion !  How  ? 
"  Thou  wentest  in  to  men  uncircumcised,  and 
didst  eat  with  them."  v.  S.  The  fact  was  indis- 
putable ;  but  the  inference,  viz.  that  he  had  acted 
irregularly,  if  not  irreligiously,  was  unfounded. 
His  brethren  reasoned  from  their  prejudices,  and 
came  to  their  conclusion  before  they  had  exa- 
mined the  merits  of  the  cause.  Nor  is  it  unwor- 
thy of  remark,  that,  in  their  complaint,  they  laid 
a  great  stress  upon  a  circumstance  which  habit 
had  erected  into  ecclesiastical  law,  but  which  it 

*  Acts,  ch.  xii. 


33 

were  vain  to  seek  in  any  commandment  of  God— 
the  unlawfulness  of  religious  or  even  social  inter- 
course with  a  Gentile !  And  so  heinous  in  their 
eyes  was  this  transgression  of  the  "  tradition  of  the 
elders/'  that  it  served  as  a  point  of  concentration 
for  their  whole  grievance.  Thou  iveutest  in  to  men 
uncircumcised  and  didst  eat  ivith  them  !  N.  B.  It  is 
no  new  thing  for  good  and  upright  men,  through 
the  force  of  prepossession,  the  want  of  informa- 
tion, and  precipitancy  of  judgment  arising  from 
both,  to  blame  that  which  God  approves ;  to  set 
themselves  against  that  which  God  has  autho- 
rized ;  and  to  be  strenuous  for  that  which  God 
disregards.  This  was  the  errour  of  Peter's  brethren. 
However,  with  the  consciousness  not  only  of 
pure  intention,  but  of  laudable  conduct,  he 
calmly  listens  to  their  accusation,  and  vindicates 
his  proceedings  in  a  manner  equally  admirable 
for  its  meekness  and  its  dignity.  "  He  rehearsed 
the  matter  from  the  beginning,  and  expounded  it 
by  order  unto  them ;"  giving  a  succinct  history 
of  the  steps  by  which  he  was  led,  under  a  divine 
communication,  to  the  house  of  Cornelius;  of  his 
preaching  the  gospel  there :  and  of  the  descent  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  upon  his  Gentile  hearers,  v.  4 — 
15.  His  reasoning  upon  the  facts  is  thus  ner- 
vously summed  up,  "  Then  remembered  I  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  how  that  he  said,  John  indeed 


34 

baptized  ivitfi  ivater ;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with 
the  Holy  Ghost,  Forasmuch,  then,  as  God  gave 
them  the  like  gift  as  he  did  unto  us  who  beUeved 
on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  what  was  I,  that  I 
could  withstand  God?"  v.  16,  17, 

The  prominent  points  in  this  reasoning  are, 

1st.  God  has  given  to  these  Gentiles  that  holy 
Spirit  of  whom  the  water  in  John's  baptism  was 
an  emblem  and  pledge. 

2d.  God  has  thus  borne  witness  to  them  as  his 
children,  and  heirs  of  his  promise. 

od.  God  has  put  them  upon  a  perfect  level  with 
ourselves,  by  this  testimony  to  their  faith  in  Christ 
Jesus ;  so  that  whatever  privileges  we  have,  they 
have  also ;  and  are  intitled  to  receive  with  us  and 
from  us. 

4th.  Under  this  evidence  of  their  gracious  rela- 
tion to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  refuse  them  the 
seal  of  that  relation  were  to  resist  God  !  And, 
therefore,  he  commanded  them  to  be  baptized  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord :  which  is  precisely  equiva- 
lent to  his  administering  the  ordinance  with  his 
own  hands. 

The  opposition  ceased — the  brethren  were 
satisfied.  They  had  been  warm  in  their  dis- 
pleasure; but  they  yielded  to  the  light  of  truth — 
they  yielded  magnanimously — when  it  Avas  once 
proved  that  these  Gentiles  were  owned  of  God; 


35 

were  placed  among  his  people,  and  blessed  with 
his  Spirit;  the  doubt  was  removed;  the  debate 
was  over:  and  instead  of  cavilling,  or  hunting  up 
small  distinctions  by  the  aid  of  which  they  might 
seem  to  acknowledge  the  Christian  character  of 
the  new  converts,  and  yet  censure  the  Apostle 
Peter  for  holding  communion  with  them,  they 
joined  together  in  humble  thankfulness  to  God 
for  this  additional  display  of  his  grace.  ''  They 
held  their  peace" — they  had  no  more  fault  to 
find,  nor  objections  to  make ;  "  and  glorified  God, 
saying,  then  hath  God  also  to  the  Gentiles 
granted  repentance  unto  hfe."  v,  18,  Why  should 
it  not  be  so  still  ?  Why  should  not  such  proof  of 
Christian  character  in  others,  no  matter  whom,  as 
we  deem  sufficient  among  ourselves,  be  at  this 
hour,  as  it  was  then,  the  rule  of  Christian  fellow- 
ship on  the  broadest  scale  ?  And  a  refusal  of  that 
communion  to  any  whom  we  own  that  God  has 
owned  by  the  same  tokens  which  he  has  given  to 
us,  be  now,  as  it  would  have  been  then,  a  with- 
standing OF  God  ? 

A  fifth  fact  occurs  in  the  history  of  the  reference 
from  Antioch,  and  of  the  proceedings  thereon  by 
the  Synod  of  Jerusalem.  Acts,  xv. 

"  Certain  men,"  ministers  of  the  word,  "  which 
came  down  from  Judea  taught  the  brethren,  and 
said.  Except  ye  be  circumcised  after  the  manner  of 


SG 

Moses^  ye  cannot  he  samd.^^  v,  1.  This  doctrine. 
false  and  dangerous,  tending  to  subvert  the  entire 
fabric  of  evangelical  truth,  Paul  and  Barnabas 
promptly  and  firmly  resisted,  v,  2.  But  the  erro- 
neous teachers  persevering,  and  being  probably 
supported  by  Jewish  converts,  with  very  little 
prospect  of  gaining  over  the  Gentiles;  it  w^as 
judged  expedient  for  the  prevention  of  feuds,  to . 
refer  the  question  to  the  Apostles  and  Presbyters 
at  Jerusalem,  v.  2.  They  accepted  the  reference 
— took  the  subject  into  consideration—condemn- 
ed the  doctrine  which  had  raised  the  ferment  in 
Antioch — prohibited  the  preaching  of  it  in  future 
— and,  with  regard  to  the  remainiiig  differenceSj 
advised  both  parties  to  forbearance  and  love,  v, 
22—29.     ■ 

The  value  of  their  decision,  as  a  precedent  for 
posterity,  lies  in  its  principle.  On  the  one  hand, 
that  venerable  council  would  not  endure,  "  no, 
not  for  an  hour,"  the  least  infringement  upon  that 
prime  essential  of  Christianity,  the  justificatioii  of  a 
sinner  by  faith  alone  :  nor,  on  the  other,  would 
they  countenance  the  spirit  of  schism  and  separa- 
tion, even  for  the  sake  of  important  differences 
which  left  both  sides  in  possession  of  the  substan- 
tial truth.  On  these  matters  they  enjoined  respect 
to  each  others  feelings — they  enjoined  bearing 
and  forbearing-~-they  enjoined  '^  endeavours  to 


37 

keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of 
peace" — they  did  not  enjoin,  nor  abet,  nor  in  any 
wise  encourage,  the  disruption  of  communion. 
Prejudice  herself  must  confess  that  the  variance 
between  the  Gentile  and  Jewish  believer  on  the 
subject  of  circumcision  and  of  the  Mosaic  law 
generally,  even  without  the  notion  of  its  necessity 
to  salvation,  was  much  wider  than  the  variance 
between  many  Christians  who  will  not  commune 
together  in  the  body  and  blood  of  their  common 
Lord.  The  sense  of  their  union  with  him,  accord- 
ing to  the  Apostolic  rule,  should  absorb  their  infe- 
rior discrepancies  of  opinion  and  practicj^  among 
themselves.  But,  directly  reversing  this  order, 
their  inferior  discrepancies  overpower  the  sense 
of  their  union  as  one  in  him.  O  how  unlike  the 
spirit  and  the  example  of  those  glorious  days  of 
the  Son  of  man! 

The  scriptural  details  might  be  prosecuted 
further;  but  it  is  superfluous.  They  are  all  of  one 
complexion.  Nor  is  there  any  hazard  in  asserting, 
without  qualification,  that  there  is  not  in  all  the 
New  Testament,  one  solitaiy  doctrine  or  fact 
which  so  much  as  implies,  or  can  be  made  by 
any  tolerable  interpretation  to  appear  to  imply, 
that  the  Lord  Jesus  has  authorized  the  exaction 
of  any  term  whatever  for  the  lohole  felloivship  of 
his  church,  other  than  visible  Christianity.  Ob- 
jections will  be  noticed  in  their  proper  place. 


38 

II.  The  second  claas  of  facts  is  furnished  by  the 
history  o^  the  primitive  church  from  the  days  of  the 
Apostles  to  the  close  of  the  fourth  century. 

It  was  not  more  her  character,  during  that  peri- 
od, to  profess  Christianity,  than  it  was  to  assert  her 
catholic  unity ;  and  to  cherish,  on  all  occasions, 
the  most  tender  soUcitude  for  its  preservation. 
This  is  so  evident,  that  an  attempt  to  set  forth  its 
proofs  at  large  would  be  altogether  impertinent. 
No  man  w^ho  has  only  glanced  at  the  waitings  of 
-the  early  fathers,  will  raise  a  doubt  on  the  subject. 
it  is  material,  however,  to  inquire  in  what  she 
viewed, her  unity  as  consisting — by  what  it  w^as 
liabk  to  be  broken — and  how  it  was  to  be  main- 
tained. 

Her  unity  consisted  in  her  common  faith,  her 
common  institutions — and  brotherly  love. 

1.  The  chief  attribute  of  her  unity  was  her 
common  faith ;  i.  e.  the  faith  which  was  common 
to  her  members  all  over  the  world. 

In  the  exposition  of  her  faith,  as  a  rallying 
point  of  union,  she  confined  herself  to  a  few  great 
principles — principles  which  are,  every  where 
and  at  all  times,  vital  to  the  rehgion  of  Jesus — 
and  without  which  it  is  impossible  there  should 
be  either  Christianity  or  Christians.  Nothing 
can  be  more  simple,  nor  summed  up  with  more 
studious  brevity  than  the  early  creeds,  or,  as  they 


.  *  were  called,  symbols  of  the  faith.  That  little 
composition,  familiarly  known  by  the  name  of 
the  "  Apostles'*  creed^'^  though  probably  not  their 
work,  may  give  the  reader  a  con*ect  idea  of  their 
general  structure.  For  his  further  satisfaction, 
however,  I  shall  translate  another  specimen  from 
Irencens^  a  disciple  of  Poly  carp  ^  and  a  most  stre- 
nuous defender  of  the  purity  of  the  faith  against 
various  heresies. 

"  The  church,  although  scattered  over  the 
!A.  ^^^^^  world,  even  to  the  extremities  of  the 
dearth,  has  received  from  the  apostles  and  their 
disciples,  the  faith,  viz.  on  one  God  the  Fath- 
er, almighty,  that  made  the  heaven  and  the  earth, 
and  the  seas,  and  all  things  therein — and  on  one 
Christ  Jesus,  the  son  of  God,  who  became  in- 
carnate for  our  salvation — and  on  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit, who,  by  the  prophets,  preached  the  dispen- 
sations, and  the  advents,  and  the  generation  from 
a  Virgin,  and  the  suffering,  and  the  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  and  the  assumption,  in  flesh,  into 
heaven,  of  our  beloved  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and 
his  coming  again  from  the  heavens  in  the  glory 
of  the  Father,  to  sum  up  all  things,  and  raise  all 
flesh  of  all  mankind ;  that  to  Christ  Jesus,  our 
Lord,  and  God,  and  Saviour,  and  King,  accord- 
ing to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  father  who  is  in- 
visible, every  knee  may  bow  of  beings  in  heaven^^ 

6 


40 

in  earth,  and  under  the  earth ;  and  every  tongue 
may  confess  to  him ;  and  that  he  may  exercise 
righteous  judgment  upon  all;  may  send  spiritual 
wickednesses,  and  transgressing  and  apostate  an- 
gels, and  ungodly,  and  unjust,  and  lawless,  and 
blasphemous  men,  into  eternal  fire.  But  on  the 
righteous  and  holy — on  those  who  have  kept  his 
commandments  and  continued  in  his  love,  whe- 
ther from  the  beginning  or  after  repentance,  may, 
with  the  gift  of  life,  bestow  incorruption,  and  put 
them  in  possession  of  eternal  gloiy."* 


*  Fidelity  rather  than  elegance  has  been  consulted  in  this  transla- 
tion. But  that  the  reader  may  judge  for  himself,  the  original  iit 
subjoined. 

ym  iuTTTA^fAiVn,  TTet^ctJ't  TOiV  ATroToKoeVi  K,a.i  rav  iKttvcev  M.oiB»rav  TTeLgftKet- 

^avrdi  THV  ilC  iVA  BiOV  ITATigA  TTatyTOXgstTOg*,  TOV  TTiTrOlUKOTA  TOV  OVPAVOTf 

KAi  T«v  ynvy  x.At  TAf  ^AKA<ra-(tif  kai  TTA'vrA  TA  iv  AVToiiy  Tnirriv'  XAt 

Ut  tVA  Xg/CTOy  I«S-OUV,  TOX  VIQV  Toy  QiQVy  Toy  a-atgXaO^VT*  l;7r«g  T«C  y^fXiTi^Ai 
ffOHTH^lAi'  KAt  UC  YiViUflA  aytOVy  to  ^IA  rCeV  7r^opHTa$V  KiKH^V^OS  TA?  0/K9- 
VO,U/*Cj  KAt  TA?  t\lVCrit?y  HAl  TUV  tit.  TlAoBiVQV  yiV^MVl^y  KAl  TO  7FaQ(i?j  KXt 
T»V  iyt^<TlV  IX.  VlK^C6Vy  KAt  TUV  tVS-AgKOV  US  TOtfC  CWgAVSt/f  AVStX»->|-/»  T6U  nyA- 

TnnfjLtvou  Xg/(rTCM  I«(rew  rowKv^tou  »f/totVf  kai  rnv  tx,  ruf  ov^AVcev  iv'Tti  J'c^if 

rev  TTATgOZ  'ra^OViriAV  AVtiUy  tTTt  TO  AyAX.l^AKAlCt(rA(TBAl  T*  TTAVTAy  KAt 
AVAO-nia-Al  TTATAV  CTA^itA  TTASTm  AV^^OiV0tHT0?y  IVA  X|/0-T«  lUfTOU  Ttt  Ktf- 
l^tCf  »fXUVy    KAl  QieSly    KAt  a-aiT'ii^ly    »A<  /^ATtkUy    KATA  T»V  tvS'oKiAV  TOW   Ilat- 

Tgo?  TOW  AQ^ArovyTAv  yovv  scA/u.'^yi  e'®'A»oygA)»/a>v  **/  i'ts-tyitav  kai  kataj^- 

8(JV4CeVy  X.AI  rWAO-A  yhailT<FA  i^OfAOXayHCritTAty  kai  K^KTIV  S'IKAIAV  iV  TOIC  tTATt 
<tB-OlilTHrAi'  TA  fA.tV  /arViVfJlAriKA  T«?  'OrOVif^lASy  KAt  AyytkOVC  '©•AgA/3«/8»XO- 
TA?,    H,C/.t  ev  AVrcrACrtA  yiyOVOTASy  KAt  roUS  Aff-i0Ugy  KAl    AS'lKOVCy  KAt    AVQ- 

t^QVSy  y.At  ^KAs-'frifAivz  Tav  AvSgoj^rajy  ug  ra  Atwviov  'Sryg  <vifx-^i$  •  T9/5  ^i  ^t- 


41 

"  This  faith,"  proceeds  Irenseus,  "  the  church, 
as  I  said  before,  has  received,  and  though  disper- 
sed over  the  whole  world,  assiduously  preserves 
as  if  she  inhabited  a  single  house ;  and  believes  in 
these  things  as  having  but  one  heart  and  one  soul : 
and  with  perfect  harmony  proclaims,  teaches, 
hands  down,  these  things  as  though  she  had  but 
one  mouth.  For  though  there  are  various  and 
dissimilar  languages  in  the  world ;  yet  the  powder 
of  the  faith  transmitted  is  one  and  the  same. 
Neither  the  churches  in  Germmiy^  nor  in  iheria^^^ 
(Spain)  "  nor  among  the  Celtcs,'^^  (in  France)  *^nor 
in  the  East^  nor  in  Egypt,  nor  in  Libya,  nor  in  the 
middle  regions  of  the  world,"  (Jerusalem  and  the 
adjacent  districts)  "  believe  or  teach  any  other 
doctrines.  But  as  the  Sun  is  one  and  the  same 
throughout  Che  whole  world ;  so  the  preaching  of 
the  truth  shines  every  where,  and  enlightens  all 
men  who  are  willing  to  come  to  the  knowledge 
of  truth.  Nor  will  the  most  pow^erful  in  speech 
among  the  governours  of  the  churches  say  any 
thing  more  than  these  ;  (for  no  one  can  be  above 
his  master ;)  nor  the  most  feeble  any  thing  less. 


xtttoiiy  KAi  oa-tois,  KAt  Tate  tvroXAs  ttvrov  t«t))|»xo^/,  KAt  <v  T>)  ayA(mi^  ttu- 

TOU  S^tAfXSfAiVUKOrt  TOti   (/Wiv)  ATT*  A^^>1fj  <TC<I  tTt  iK  jUlTAVOtA^,  ^UHV  '^U^lCrA" 

Ibkw.  Adversus  Hareses,  Lib.  I.  c.  2.  p.  45.  ed.  Grabe. 


42 

For  as  there  is  but  one  faith,  he  who  is  "  able  to 
speak  much  cannot  enlarge ;  nor  he  who  can  say 
little,  diminish  it."* 

It  is  clear  that  this  venerable  father  did  not 
mean  to  give  the  very  words  of  any  formula  of 
faith ;  but  to  state,  substantially,  those  high  and 
leading  truths  in  which  all  the  churches  of  Christ 
over  the  whole  world  harmonized;  and  which 
formed  the  doctrinal  bond  of  their  union. 

It  is  also  certain,  that  as  heresies,  coiTupting 
any  mrfZina/ principle  of  Christianity,  arose  in  the 
church,  her  public  profession  met  them  by  an 
©pen  and  decisive  assertion  of  the  injured  truth. 
This  necessarily  enlarged,  by  degrees,  the  num- 
ber of  articles  in  her  creed,  as  w  ell  as  the  scope 
of  her  ministerial  instruction.  But  her  mainte- 
nance of  the  faith  was  always  pointed  and  brief. 
She  never  launched  out  into  wide  discussion ; 
never  pursued  principles  to  their  remote  conse- 
quences ;  nor  embarrassed  her  testimony  by  nu- 
merous and  minute  applications.  These  were 
left  then  as  they  ought  to  be  now,  and,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  must  be,  in  a  very  great  mea- 
sure, to  the  intelligence  and  fidelity  of  her  minis- 
tiT.    But  the  basis  of  her  communion  w  as  laid 


*  Irfv.  ib.  c.  S.  p.  46.    See  to  the  same  purpose,  Cyprian,  de  imi' 
tau  Ecclcsm.  Opp.  p.  108.  ed.  Fell.  Oxon.  1682. 


43 

so  broad,  in  the  vital  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  that 
all  who  "  held  the  head,"  in  whatever  spot  of  the 
globe,  might  join,  as  they  had  opportunity,  in  the 
reciprocation  of  Christian  kindnesses,  and  the  en- 
joyment of  Christian  privileges.  For  proof  of  this 
a  single  fact  will  suffice.  The  most  copious  of 
all  her  confessions,  framed  toward  the  close  of  the 
fourth  century,  or  about  A.  D.  373,  nearly  two  hun- 
dred years  after  Irena3us,  was  designed,  expressly, 
to  guard  and  vindicate  the  common  faith  against 
the  numerous  heresies  of  the  age.  "  All  the  or- 
thodox bishops,"  says  Epiphanius,.  "  and,  in  a 
word,  the  whole  catholic  church,  in  opposition  to 
those  heresies,  and  conformably  to  the  pre-estab- 
lished faith  of  those  holy  fathers"  (the  Apostles 
and  their  successors)  "  affirm  and  maintain  as 
follows ;   We  believe,'^^  ^-c.  * 

He  then  recites  the  creed  at  length.  It  is  sub- 
stantially the  same  with  the  one  already  quoted ; 
to  the  specifications  of  which  it  gives  greater  am- 
plitude, and  closer  application.  Yet  this  enlar- 
ged creed  ivould  not  Jill,  or  more  than  fill,  three 
PAGES  of  the  present  work  !  ! 


*Tfiiit  Ti  KCii  T)(ifii,  KOI  jravTii  oi  op9o?o^oi  ijricrxoffoi,  koi  av\KT\^^-(\v  naua  h  0.710  Ka« 
SoXixTi  ExxATia-ia  ffyoi  tas  avaxo^^acrat  aijfcriis  okoXouScoj  rn  tcov  tt7iuv  tucivuv  van 
juv  s'poTiTa7(itvTi  rriaTii,  our&w  Kijctifv,  fiah<Tra  toii  ayioa  Kvrgu)  n^oaiovatv,  Iva  ciray- 
'yihXmt  not  KtywcTi  ouTWi.  IliSTEIOMEN  u.  t.  h.  Epiph.  Jncor.  V^l.  0pp.  T. 
//.  p.  123,  P€lavii.  1622.      . 


44  ^ 

It  is  now  apparent  in  what  the  doctrinal  unity 
of  the  primitive  church  consisted.  It  was  in 
holding  and  professing  the  same  faith  on  pointe 
immediately  affecting  our  eternal  hope. 

2d.  The  second  principle  of  her  unity  was  found 
in  her  common  institutions. 

These,  again,  without  descending  to  subordi- 
nate variations  or  local  observances,  were  her 
ministry,  her  worshipping  assemblieSj  and  her 
sacraments. 

Whatever  alterations  passed,  in  process  of 
time,  upon  \heform  of  her  ministry  and  worship, 
there  was  no  place  nor  period,  in  which  their  sub- 
stance was  not  accounted  sacred.  On  the  one 
hand  she  resisted,  with  jealous  promptitude,  eve- 
ry intrusion  into  her  official  functions;  and,  on 
the  other,  her  ministers  were  ministers  of  her 
whole  body,  and  so  acknowledged  and  employed 
wherever  they  happened  to  be,  under  such  re- 
strictions only  as  prudence  rendered  it  necessary 
to  impose  for  the  preservation  of  public  order. 
A  ministry  and  a  ministry  she  understood  not. 
It  was  one.  To  interdict  a  minister  of  the  gos- 
pel, with  suitable  credentials,  from  preaching  or 
other  service  of  the  sanctuary,  in  any  ))articular 
church  whatever,  on  the  pretence  of  its  being 
unlawful  to  receive  him  and  to  join  with  him  in 
ministerial  conununionj  she  would  have  held  in 


^  45 

abomination.  Severance  of  church  from  church 
— worship  from  worship — sacraments  from  sacra- 
ments, under  the  notion  of  separate  Christian  in- 
terests, and  the  denial  of  reciprocal  fellowship, 
she  condemned  and  detested.  Cyprian's  trea- 
tise on  the  unity  of  the  church:*  and  his  corres- 
pondence relative  to  the  Novation  schism,  will 
satisfy  any  candid  man  of  the  truth  of  this  repre- 
sentation. Proof  in  detail  is  forborne  at  present, 
as  it  will  be  incorporated  with  subsequent  mat- 
ter; and  will  thus  prevent  a  needless  if  not  weari- 
some repetition. 

3d.  The  third  great  point  of  primitive  unity  was^ 
brotherly  love. 

Let  brotherly  love  continue ;  was  an  injunction 
among  the  last  which  proceeded  from  the  sanc- 
tified lips  of  Paul  the  apostle,  the  aged,  the  mar- 
tyr. And  for  the  best  of  reasons.  It  is  a  lesson 
the  most  likely  to  be  forgotten,  and  the  most  im- 
portant to  be  remembered,  of  all  the  practical 
lessons  which  have  been  given  to  the  childreu 
©f  men.  The  most  likely  to  be  forgotten:  be- 
cause eveiy  form  and  particle  of  their  depravity- 
has  an  interest  in  counteracting  it — the  most  im- 
portant to  be  remembered:  because  it  is  the 
principal  proof  of  their  reconciliation  and  com- 

♦  De  imitate  Ecdtsiet.  0pp.  pp.  104—120.  Ed.  Feix^ 


AS 

tti union  with  God,  and  the  mainspring  of  their 
happiness  both  in  this  Hfe  and  that  which  is  to 
come.  Hatred,  and  her  whole  brood  of  envy- 
ings,  strifes,  clamours,  jealousies,  discords,  are 
from  hell — the  undisputed  progeny  of  Satan — 
Charity,  with  her  gentleness,  kindness,  long-suf- 
fering, mercies,  meekness,  and  the  whole  train 
of  personal  lovelinesses  and  social  graces,  are 
from  above ;  the  fair  and  guileless  offspring  of  the 
^'  Father  of  lights."  The  very  end  of  the  Re- 
deemer's mission — the  ultimate  object  of  his 
doctrines,  his  precepts,  his  example,  his  tears,  his 
sacrifice,  w^as  to  overthrow  the  reign  of  malice, 
and  to  rear  upon  its  ruins  the  empire  of  love. 
For  this  purpose  ivas  the  Son  of  God  manifested^ 
that  he  might  destroy  the  ivorks  of  the  Devil,  But 
God  is  love;  and  he  that  dwelleth  in  love  dwelleth 
in  God  and  God  in  him.  On  the  contrary,  he  that 
loveth  not^  hiovjeth  not  God,  Thence  the  empha- 
sis of  those  memorable  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus  ; 
Hereby  shall  <dl  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disci- 
ples^ if  ye  have  love  one  to  another.  In  fact,  the 
religion  which  he  has  instituted  and  which  his 
Spirit  teaches,  is  the  only  religion  upon  the  face 
of  the  earth  which  makes  love  its  principle. 
Even  Justification  by  faith  is  related  to  love  as  a 
means  to  an  end.  It  is  he  who  "  believeth 
God,"  that  worketh  righteousness,  and  loves  his 
neighbour. 


47 

In  this  divine  quality  of  their  religion  the  pri- 
mitive Christians  shone  forth  with  a  lustre  which 
eclipses  and  darkens  the  church  of  modern  days. 
That  there  existed  then,  as  there  exist  now, 
whisperings,  and  backbitings,  and  evil  surmises 
— that  Jealousy  raised  strife,  and  ambition  par- 
ties— that  the  simple  followed  where  the  crafty 
led — that  Zeal  often  lent  herself  to  vain  glory  ra- 
ther than  to  godly  edifying  ;  while  Truth  frowned 
and  Charity  wept,  is  very  certain.  Absolute 
freedom  from  those  ungracious  tempers  which 
divide  and  alienate  even  the  wise  and  good,  is 
for  the  heavenly  state.  It  belongs  not  to  flesh 
and  blood:  to  men  of  "  like  passions;"  and 
those  passions  too  often  sinful. 

Yet  with  all  her  imperfections  on  this  pomt ; 
with  all  the  wranglings  and  schisms  which 
sprung  up  in  her  bosom,  the  primitive  church, 
as  a  whole ^  presented  a  family  picture  which 
should  make  us  blush;  and  looidd  make  us 
blush,  if  we  had  not,  by  inveterate  habits  of  col- 
lision, and  by  the  artifice  of  bestowing  hallowed 
names  upon  unhallowed  things,  rid  ourselves,  in 
a  great  degree,  of  Christian  shame.  That  which 
was  the  exception  among  the  "  elders,"  seems  to 
be  the  rule  among  the  moderns.  Their  concord 
was  the  rule,  their  disagreements  the  exception  ; 
our  concord  is  the  exception,  our  disagreements 

7 


48 

the  rule.  We  should  feel  it  to  be  a  cmel  satire^, 
were  any  one  to  say  of  us,  as  the  Pagans 
did  of  the  early  believers,  "  Behold,  how  these 
Christians  love  one  another  I" 

In  this  fraternal  affection  did  they  account 
much  of  their  unity  to  consist.  Their  most  dis- 
tinguished men  laboured  unweariedly  to  pre- 
serve and  promote  it :  and  did  not  hesitate  to 
pronounce  the  violation  of  it  to  be  a  practical 
renunciation  of  Christianity  itself. 

As  the  truth  of  this  representation  is  generally 
admitted,  since  it  is  every  where  the  theme  of 
Christian  panegyric,  no  authorities  are  quoted 
to  support  it :  for  it  would  be  idle  to  prove  what 
nobody  denies.  Yet  if  the  reader  should  be  at 
all  sceptical,  he  shall  have  his  doubts  removed 
by  what  is  to  follow — the  proof  of  some  other 
matters  necessarily  involving  the  proof  of  this 
also.  Its  use  in  the  main  question  before  us 
will  be  seen  in  due  time.  Proceed  we,  then^  to 
inquire^ 

2.  By  what  the  primitive  church  considered 
her  unity  as  liable  to  be  broken. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  begin,  after  the  good 
old  way  ;  and  shew,  negatively^  what  she  did  not 
reckon  as  breaches  of  unity.  In  this  predica- 
ment, she  comprehended  all  varieties  of  opinion 
and  observance  which  do  not  subvert  the  founda- 


49 

tion  of  evangelical  truth  and  order.  All  which 
do  not  impeach  a  man's  claim  to  the  character 
of  a  sincere  disciple  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  What- 
ever they  were,  vrithin  these  limits,  they  did 
not,  in  her  judgment,  dissolve  the  bonds  of  her 
union :  by  none  of  them  was  it  impaired. 

Not  by  a  difference  in  rites  and  customs  m 
worship — 

Nor  by  imperfections  in  moral  discipline — 
Nor  by  diversities  in  iheform  of  government — 
Nor  by  dissonant  views  on  subordinate  points 
of  doctrine, 

1st.  Not  by  a  difference  in  ntes  and  customs 
in  worship. 

That  there  were  discordant  practices  even 
in  the  Apostolic  church  itself,  is  clear  from 
the  records  of  the  New  Testament ;  and  equal- 
ly clear  that  they  were  not  allowed  to  inter- 
rupt the  harmony  of  her  communion.  A  great 
part  of  Paul's  argument,  in  his  first  epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  ch.  xi.  concerning  the  deco- 
rum which  the  sexes  ought  to  study  in  their 
modes  of  dress  when  engaged  in  public  worship, 
rests  upon  the  habits  of  society.  Now  these,  in 
so  far  as  they  interfered  neither  with  the  ordi- 
nances of  worship,  nor  wdth  pure  iPiorals,  might 
very  innocently  vary  in  various  places.  He 
winds  up  his  remarks,  after  freely  giving  hh 


50 

opinion  on  the  question  of  propriety  at  that  time 
among  the  Corinthians,  by  saying,  If  any  man 
seem  to  be  conteiitious^  we  have  no  such  custom, 
neither  the  churches  of  God.  "  A  contentious 
man,"  it  is  Calvin^s  comment ;  "  A  contentious 
man  is  one  who  wantonly  stirs  up  strife,  regard- 
less of  the  prevalence  of  truth.  Such  are  all 
they  who,  without  necessity,  carp  at  good  and 
useful  rites,'^  &c.  From  the  words  of  the  Apos- 
tle one  thing  is  plain ;  viz.  that  matters  of 
secondary  moment,  relating  even  to  the  worship 
of  God,  are  no  justifiable  cause  of  "  contention" 
among  Christians. 

Does  this  construction  appear  too  bold  and 
too  broad  ?  It  shall  be  confirmed  by  Paul  him- 
self. Wide  differences  of  opinion  and  practice 
existed  between  Christians  in  his  time  about  the 
distinction  of  meats  and  of  days  which  were 
established  under  the  Jewish  dispensation.  The 
discreet  Apostle,  aware  of  men's  propensity  to 
bend  every  thing  to  their  own  rule,  with  very 
little  regard  to  the  feelings  of  others ;  and  to 
array  their  uncharitableness  in  the  livery  of  zeal 
for  religion,  interposes  to  prevent  the  sacrifice  of 
one  party  to  the  rashness  or  vanity  of  the  other : 
telling  them  J^hat  they  might  both  serve  God 
acceptably.  He  that  regardeth  the  day,  regardeth 
it  unto  the  Lord :  and  he  that  regardeth  not  the 


51 

day^  to  the  Lord  he  doth  not  regard  it.  He  that 
eatethy  eateth  to  the  Lord;  for  he  giveth  God 
thanks:  and  he  that  eateth  notj  to  the  Lord  he 
eateth  not ;  and  giveth  God  thanks,*  Be  it  so, 
that  Christians  or  Christian  churches  have  scru- 
ples and  attachments  which  neither  go  the  whole 
length  of  evangelical  freedom,  nor  even  rise  up 
to  the  height  of  evangelical  purity — ^be  it  so, 
that  they  who  see  these  infirmities  are  them- 
selves of  clearer  light,  stronger  faith,  and  larger 
liberty.  Yet  they  may  not,  says  Paul,  pour 
contempt  upon  their  brethren :  much  less  stand 
at  a  haughty  distance,  as  if  they  were  not  disci- 
ples of  a  common  master.  Nor,  may  those  of 
less  attainments,  "  the  weak,"  as  Paul  terms 
them,  indulge  even  a  censorious  temper  to- 
ward the  others.  Instead  of  such  unseemli- 
ness, let  us  judge  this  rather,  that  no  man  put 
a  stumbling  block  or  an  occasion  to  fall  in  his 
brother^  way,  "  O  Christians,"  exclaims  he, 
"  your  best  interests  are  untouched  by  these 
inferior  disagreements.  The  kingdom  of  God  is 
not  meat  and  drink ;  but  righteousness,  and  peace^ 
and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  For  he  that  in  these 
things,  viz.  righteousness,  and  peace,  and  joy  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,  serveth  Christ,  is  acceptable  to 

*  Rom.  xiv.  6. 


62 

God,  and  approved  of  men.  Laying  aside,  there- 
fore, all  janglings  and  heart-burnings  about  other 
matters,  let  us  follow  after  the  things  which  make 
for  PEACE  ;  and  things  wherewith  one  may  edify, 
may  build  up,  not  pull  down,  another*  This 
was  Paul's  advice  concerning  disputes  about  the 
religious  distinction  of  meats  and  days.  And 
when  the  contest  relative  to  circumcision  had 
created  warm  blood  between  Christians,  he 
pursued  the  same  healing  course.  Perpetually 
calling  them  off  from  their  subaltern  polemics  to 
their  great  concern^  which  was  worth  fighting, 
and  bleeding,  and  burning  for — ^he  cries  out, 
Circumcision  is  nothings  and  uncircumcision  is 
nothing;  but  keeping  of  the  commandments  of 
God\ — is — every  thing!  And  again.  In  Christ 
Jesus  neither  circumcision  availeth  any  things  nor 
uncircumcision^  hut  a  new  creature.  And  as 
many  as  walk  according  to  this  rule^  viz.  that  it  is 
the  being  a  new  creature  in  Christ  Jesus,  which 
contains  the  pith  and  marrow,  the  vigour  and 
glory  of  our  good  confession,  peace  he  on  them 
and  mercy  !  Circumcised  or  uncircumcised  ;  lay- 
ing stress  upon  this  custom,  or  laying  none,  I 
have  no  quarrel  with  them  ;  nor  ought  others  to 
have  any.      For  notwithstanding   this   dissent, 

^"^  Rom.  xiii.  17—19.         i  Cor.  vii.  19, 


53 

they  all  are  the  Israel  of  God ;  and  such  they 
shall  be  found  and  acknowledged  to  be,  when 
many  who  are  at  daggers-drawing  about  the 
carnal  rite  shall  be  disowned  by  their  Judge. 
For  my  own  part,  saith  the  Apostle,  I  have 
things  of  much  higher  moment  to  fill  up  my 
heart,  my  hours,  and  my  efforts.  /  am  set  for 
the  defence  of  the  Gospel;  and  will  not  descend  to 
these  petty  conflicts.  My  back  scarred  with  the 
scourge,  my  limbs  bruised  with  stones,  for  the 
cross  of  Christ,  will  shew  whether  my  resolution 
proceeds  from  a  selfish  motive,  or  from  a  proper 
estimate  of  a  cause  which  will  justify  and  re- 
pay my  sufferings.  From  henceforth  let  no  man 
trouble  me  :  for  I  bear  in  my  body  the  marks  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  /*  Sage  and  Hero !  every  man  iri 
whose  heart  the  love  of  Jesus  reigns,  would  fly 
to  "  kiss  thy  lips  for  giving  so  right  an  answer. "f 
As  was  his  doctrine,  so  was  his  example.  He 
circumcised  Timothy  to  sooth  a  Jewish  preju- 
dicej — he  submitted,  by  the  advice  of  the  Pres- 
byters at  Jerusalem,  to  a  useless  but  harmless 
ceremony,  in  "  purifying  himself"  along  with 
"  four  men  who  had  a  vow  on  them ;"  for  the 
express  purpose  of  disproving  the  charge  of  his 


*  Ga4.  vi.  15—17.         t  Pt'o^-  ^txiv.  26.  I  Acts,,  xvi.  5. 


64 

making  war  upon  the  "  customs" — religious  cus- 
toms— customs  belonging  to  divine  tcorship^  which 
converts  from  the  Jews  had  retained  from  the 
ancient  ceremonial.*  Summanly,  he  accom- 
modated himself  to  all  classes  of  men,  and  all 
their  customs,  whenever  such  courtesy  did  not 
imply  a  surrender  of  truth.  About  customs  as 
customs  he  strove  not.  Yet  this  same  conde- 
scending, accommodating  Paul,  who  went  every 
length  consistently  with  the  safety  of  substantial 
principles,  would  not  stir  an  hair's  breadth  at 
the  hazard  of  injuring  them.  Here  he  was  un- 
yielding, unmanageable,  inexorable  as  Death. 
Upon  such  terms,  however  innocent,  or  even  lau- 
dable, customs  and  rites  might  be  in  themselves ; 
however  dear  to  a  tender  but  misguided  con- 
science, his  maxim  was — '^  Touch  not,  taste  not, 
handle  not."  Remove  this  single  objection — 
shew  that  his  compliance  was  not  exacted  as 
an  approbation — that  no  vital  truth  was  to  be 
wounded — and,  "  to  the  Jew  he  became  as  a 
Jew — to  those  under  the  law,  as  under  the  law — 
to  those  without  the  law,  as  without  the  law — 
to  all  men  all  things"! — for  what  purpose  ?  To 
"  gain  some" — to  promote  the  common  salva- 
tion !  This  is  that  Paul  the  Apostle ! 

"  Acts,  xxi.  20—26.         t  1  Cor.  ix.  21. 


55 

The  same  spirit  animated  the  church  after  he 
had  left  it.  When  the  Jewish  controversy  was 
settled  forever,  there  was  still  a  variety  of  obser- 
vances in  different  places.  They  necessarily 
arose  out  of  different  climate,  pi;evious  habits, 
social  institutions,  national  character ;  and  were 
as  necessarily  continued,  and  naturally  increas- 
ed. The  general  fact  is  stated  and  explained 
in  the  ecclesiastical  histories  which  are  in  every 
one's  hands.  They  produced,  however,  no  dis- 
cord nor  inconvenience,  till  about  the  middle  of 
the  second  century,  when  sharp  and  vehement 
contests  arose  between  the  Asiatic  and  western 
Christians  about  the  celebration  of  Easter.  The 
former  keeping  this  feast  on  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  first  Jew  ish  month,  at  the  time  that  the 
Jews  celebrated  their  passover,  three  days  before 
the  anniversaiy  of  Christ's  resurrection ;  the  lat- 
ter keeping  it  on  the  night  immediately  preceding 
that  anniversary.*  This  difference  may  appear 
very  trifling  to  those  who  do  not  observe  Easter 
at  all ;  but  to  the  primitive  Christians  it  was  far 
from  being  a  trifle.  Their  devotional  habits,  in 
many  things  inaccurate,  and  in  this  among  the 
rest,  made  it  a  question  of  high  importance. 


^  Mosheira,  Vol.  I.  p.  203. 

8 


56 

Yet  though  neither  party  yielded  to  tlie  other^ 
they  did  not,  on  that  account,  break  the  bonds 
of  charity.* 

Toward  the  end  of  the  century,  Victor,  bishop 
of  Rome,  as  bishops  were  in  those  days,  under- 
took to  force  upon  the  Asiatic  Christians  the  cus- 
tom of  the  west;  and  on  their  refusing  to  com- 
ply, "  broke  communion  with  them,  pronounced 
them  unworthy  of  the  name  of  brethren,  and 
excluded  them  from  all  fellowship  with  the 
church  of  Rome."t  But  Victor  and  his  asso- 
ciates were  obliged  to  give  back  ;  and  both  sides 
"  retained  their  own  customs  until  the  fourth 
century,  when  the  council  of  Nice  abolished  that 
of  the  Asiatics,  and  rendered  the  time  of  the 
celebration  of  Easter  the  same  through  all  the 
Christian  churches."! 

There  is  extant  on  this  subject  a  fragment  of 
IrenseuSjibeing  part  of  a  letter  which  he  wrote 
in  his  own  name  and  the  name  of  his  brethren, 
to  Victor;  and  which  had  great  influence  in 
healing  tlie  breach.     It  is  worth  inserting. 

After  admonishing  Victor  that  he  ought  not, 
for  such  a  reason,  "  to  cut  off  from  communion 
whole  churches  of  God  w^ho  observed  the  custom 
handed  down  from  their  ancestors,"  he  adds : 


*  Mosheim,  Vol.  I.  p.  204..         f  lb.  p.  204,  205.         |  lb. 


51 

''-  Not  only  is  there  a  controversy  about  the 
day,  but  a])out  the  very  form,  of  the  fast.  For 
some  think  it  ought  to  be  kept  for  one  day, 
others  for  two,  others  even  for  several ;  others 
measure  for  their  term  forty  hours,  including  both 
night  and  day.  And  this  variety  among  those  who 
keep  it,  has  not  originated  in  our  times,  but 
prevailed  long  before  us ;  our  predecessors,  it 
seems,  not  having  been  very  scrupulous  with 
regard  to  accuracy;  but  having  adopted  their 
custom  in  their  simplicity  and  according  to  their 
peculiar  feelings,  handed  it  down,  thus  diversi- 
fied, to  the  succeeding  age.  But  all  these  were 
not,  therefore,  the  less  at  peace  among  them- 
selves, nor  are  we.  71ie  difference  about  the  fast 
commends  the  agreement  in  the  faith, 

"  The  Presbyters  who,  before  Soter,  ruled  the 
church  which  you  now  govern  ;  we  mean  Ani- 
cetus,  and  Pius,  and  Hyginus,  and  Telesphorus^ 
.and  Xystiis,  neither  observed  themselves,  nor 
permitted  their  people  to  observe,  the  day  which 
is  kept  by  the  Asiatic  Christians :  and,  never- 
theless, while  they  did  not  observe  that  day,  they 
maintained  peace*  with  the  other  Presbyters  who 
did,  when  they  visited  them ;  although  the  ob- 
servance was  more  obnoxious  to  them,  than  the 

*  *'  Maintaining  peace,"  in  the  phraseology  of  Irenaeus  and   the 
primitive  Christians,  is  equivalent  with  "  holding  communion." 


58 

non-observance  to  the  Asiatics ;  yet  never  were 
any,  on  account  of  this  diversity,  cast  ont  of  the 
church.     But  the  Presbyters  wdio  preceded  you, 
and  did  not  keep  the  day,  sent  the  Eucharist  to 
the  others  who  did.     And  when  blessed  Polycarp 
went  on  a  journey  to  Rome  in  the  time  of  Ani- 
cetus,  and  they  had  some  Uttle  difference  about 
other  matters,  they  immediately  dropped  it  for 
the   sake   of  peace  ;  and  would  by  no  means 
cherish  contention  on  this  head.    Anicetus  could 
not,  indeed,  persuade  Polycarp  to  relinquish  his 
observance  ;  as  having  always  kept  it  with  John, 
the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  and  the  other  x4postles 
with  whom  he  had  been  conversant.     Nor  did 
Polycarp  persuade  Anicetus  to  adopt  it,  as   he 
pleaded  for  the  necessity  of  retaining  the  custom 
of  the  Presbyters  who  had  gone  before  him.    Yet 
while  things  were  in  this  state,  they  held  com- 
munion  ivith  each  other.     And  in  the  church,  Ani- 
cetus, from  pure  respect,  yielded  to  Polycarp  the 
dispensation  of  the  Eucharist^  and  they  amicably 
separated  from  each  other;  and  the  peace  of 
the  whole  church  was  preserved,  both  by  those 
who  kept  the  day,  and  those  who  did  not."* 
Thus  Irenseus. 

*  The  importance  of  this  document,  on  several  accounts,  will  be 
deemed  a  sufficieut  apology  for  accompanying  it  with  the  original,  not- 
withstanding its  length. 


59 

In  the  next  century  there  was  a  keen  contro- 
versy concerning  the  validity  of  baptism  admi- 
nistered by  heretics,  as  well  as  concerning  their 
readmission  into  the  Catholic  church.  Stepha- 
nus,  bishop  of  Rome,  had  acted  with  hauteur  and 
even  violence  towards  the  celebrated  Cyprian. 
This  drew  from  Firmilianus,  bishop  of  Csesarea 


%iS'ovi  ctvTou  Txf  vituTiiAi.     'Oi  fxiv  yAg  oiovTitf  fAiAv   i)fj.igtv  (Tg/v  oLvrous 

V»(rriUilV  01  cTg  cTyO,    Ol  cTs  ^  TTXS/OV*?*  Ot  S'i  THrO-CtPi.KOVTA  Wg*?)   i/USPlVXC  TS 

^  vvureoivo-c  <rvju.iu.irgova-i  t»v  ^fAigAV  ttwrm.  K«/  Toixvrn  fxsv  ttoikixhc 
Tcev  S'uT/TM^suvTav,  ov  vvv  iip^  »/ucev  ysyovvitty  oLWct  KAfwoxu  tirpoTegov  etB-i 
TceV  -cr^o  »^a)V,  Tav  'nrst^at  to  ctK^t&igy  ug  s/xo?,  KgitrouvTuv,  tuv  kciQ'  o-TTKo- 

TUTO,  kj  iS'tCDTKrfAOV  (TWhQuAV  iiC  TO  (/.iTi'TXrilTO.  TS-ifO-QDlKO'TaV.  Kctt  OvS'iV 
tXATTOV  lirctVTi?  QUTOt  ilgHViU(Ta.V  Tg,   Xj  il^HViVOjUiV    TT^og   etKKHKOUg'  ^  W    S'lA- 

q)eovistTnc  vHO-TUnt-c  t«v  o/uovoictv  T«f  'art^naxy  a-vvia-TH^i. 

Kelt  ot  tsr^o  2aT»go?  tirgi<T^u<Tigot  oi  TS-goTTAvn-ig  rug  iKicKHTtAif  «c  vvv 
apuyyii  Avikhtov  Xiyo/xiv  Kcti  ITiov,  Tyivoy  n  kai  TeKss-^o^ov,  Kctt  Sva-Tovy 
ovn  Aurot  irngHo-Av,  ourt  Tots  /utr'  uurov?  tTnrgiTrov.     Kai  ovS'iv  iKArrov 

AV<TOt  fMI  Tilg'jVVTiCy  Hg»ViUOV  TOli  AUSr^  TOtV  fSrA^OtKlOOV  SV  Otjf  ST^PS/TO,  (gX'^" 
fJt,iV0l5  fSr^Og  AVTOVSy  HAtrOl  jULAXXOV  iVAYTlOV  ilV  TO  TUgitV  TOli  fAH  TilgOUO-f  Xj 
OuS'iTroTi  S'lA  TO  itS'oS  TQVTO  ATTi^KifQilCrAV    TIVH.       AW\.'  AUTOt   fJLi)  TUgOVVTeC 

hi  TT^o  (Toy  'zs-gio-^vligot  Toii  Ataro  tuv  TVAgoiKicev  Tiigova-tv  ivrifxTTov  iv)(Agi(r- 

llAV.       KaITOV  f/.AX.AgiOU  rioXWXAgWOy  i'SrtS'UfJl.Ha-AVTOS  T«  PffljCtH  tri  AviKulcUj 

•AAi  fongi  AKXiDvlivcev  fxiagA  a-^ovla  tt^o?  stx^»^owc,  st/Qu?  s;g»v2ycr«tv,  'angi 
lovlou  lev  KipAKAiou  /uii  (f>iKigi<rTi\a-A\lig  httJlcivc.  Ovli  yAg  0  AviKulos  lov 
TloAvicAgTrov  ttiktahSuvaIo  ^»  7«g«n',  a7«  y-^^^  laAvvculov  y.A^yQov  Ku§/ow 
ytfAtoV)  XjKoiTTuv  Afa-oa-loKmv  ch  cruvS'ttlgi-^iVi  AitlilngyncolA'  ovli  fA»v  o  UoKU" 
KA^'sros  Tov  AviKifloy  iitiia-e  7»§s'v,  KtyovlAj  lav  a-uvuBuAv  lo»v  <rs'go  avIou 
mrgio-^vligoiv  otpiKuv  KAli^uv.  Kai  toJIuv  cvtco?  i^ovlaiVf  ncoivoovntrAV  IauIoic 
xj  ivlij  iKKXiKTiA  tB-A^ixagyiirilHV  iu^A^KrltAvlto  TToXwxAgTrai,  kaT  ivlgo/zfuv 
S'uKoyoliy  kj  fxtT  iignvnc  ATT^  AKXitXav  A7niK\Ay)i<rAV ,  'arA<r>ic  tus  iK-AXn<riAs  g/gx- 
V/jV  f/jvloev  H;la)V  lugovvlaVy  x^lav  fxi)  lugcvvlcov. 

Ike^%  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  L.  VI.  c.  24.  T.  I.  p.  216—249- 
Ed.  Reading,  1720. 


60 

in  Cappadocia,  about  A.  D.  256,  a  letter  to  Cy- 
prian, in  which  is  the  following  statement. 

"  But  that  thej  who  are  at  Rome  do  not  en- 
tirely observe  all  things  which  have  been  handed 
down  from  the  beginning ;  and  that  they  appeal 
in  vain  to  Apostolic  authority  for  their  own  usa- 
ges, any  one  may  know  from  the  fact  qf  his 
seeing  that  there  are  some  differences  among 
them  about  the  days  on  which  the  Paschal  feast'^ 
(before  Easter)  "  is  to  be  kept ;  and  about  many 
other  particulars  of  divine  worship ;  and  that  they 
have  not  precisely  the  same  observances  there  as 
prevail  in  Jerusalem.  So  likewise,  in  a  very 
great  number  of  other  provinces,  many  things 
vary  according  to  the  diversity  of  place  and  j^eople ; 
but  nevertheless  these  variations  have  at  no  time 
infringed  the  peace  and  unity  of  the  Catholic 
church  :  which  Stephanus  has  now  dared  to 
do  ;  breaking  that  peace,  in  regard  to  you,  which 
his  predecessors  always  maintained  with  you," 
(the  African  churches)  "  in  mutual  love  and 
honour."* 


*  Eos  autem  qui  Romas  sunt  non  ea  in  omnibus  observare  quae  sunt 
ab  origine  tradita,  et  frustra  Apostolorum  auctoritatem  praetendere ; 
scire  qufs  etiara  inde  potest,  quod  circa  celebrandos  dies  pasehse,  et 
circa  multa  alia  divinae  rei  sacraraenta,  videat  esse  apud  illos  aliquas 
diversitates  ;  nee  observari  illic  omnia  aequaliter  quae  Hierosolymis 
observantur.  Secundum  quod  in  ceteris  quoque  plurimis  provinciis, 
multa  pro  locorum  et  noininum  diversitate  variantur  ;  nee  tamen  prop- 


61 

The  great  Augustine,  bishop  of  Hippo,  who 
flourished  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth,  and 
beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  has  settled  this 
question  with  equal  perspicuity  and  precision. 

"  Concerning  the  various  observances  in  vari- 
ous places,"  says  he,  "  there  is  one  most  whole- 
some rule  to  be  followed :  Wherever  we  see  or 
know  to  be  instituted  customs  which  are  not 
contraiy  to  the  faith,  nor  to  good  morals,  and 
have  any  tendency  to  promote  amendment  of 
life,  we  ought,  instead  of  disapproving,  to  com- 
mend and  imitate  them,  if  the  infirmity  of  some 
do  not  oppose  such  a  hindrance  as  shall  produce 
more  harm  than  our  compliance  can  do  good."* 

Again:  "  I  have  often  perceived,  with' pain 
and  grief,  that  weak  Christians  are  exceedingly 
disturbed  by  the  contentious  obstinacy  or  super- 
stitious timidity  of  some  brethren^  who,  in  matters 


ter  hoc  ab  Ecclesiae  Catholicee  pace  atque  unitate  aliquando  discessum 
est.  Quod  nunc  Stephanas  ausus  est  facere,  rumpens  adversum  vos 
pacem  quam  semper  antecessores  ejus  vobiscum  amore  et  honore  rau- 
tuo  custodierunt.  Cypbiani  Opp.  part :  II.  p.  220. 

*  De  iis  quee  varie  per  diversa  loca  observantur,  una  in  his  saluber- 
riraa  regula  tenenda  est — ut  quae  non  sunt  contra  Fidem,  neque  contra 
bonos  mores,  et  habent  aliquid  ad  exhortationem  vltae  melioris,  ubicun- 
que  institui  videmus,  vel  instituta  cognoscimus,  non  solum  non  impro- 
bemus,  sed  etiam  laudando  et  iraitando  sectemur,  si  aliquorum  infirmi- 
tas  non  ita  impedit,  ut  majus  detrimentum  sit. 

AifGVST.  ep.  119.  ad  Januarium,  cap.  18, 
opp.  T.  V.  II.  col.  576, 


G2 

of  this  sort,  which  cannot  be  certainly  determined 
either  bj  the  authority  of  the  Holy  Scripture,  or 
tradition  of  the  universal  church,  or  any  utility 
in  the  reformation  of  life — led  away  by  some 
petty  reasoning  of  their  own,  or  because  they 
have  been  Accustomed  to  see  it  so  in  their  own 
country ;  or  because  they  may  have  met  with  it 
in  their  travels,  and  fancy  themselves  so  much 
the  wdser — ^raise  such  litigious  questions,  as 
to  think  nothing  right  but  what  they  do  them- 
selves."* 

The  venerable  father  has  given  us  not  merely 
his  own  judgment,  but,  indirectly,  the  judgment 
of  the  Catholic  church.  For  he  says  that  they 
were  only  "  some  brethren ;"  and  those  either 
"  obstinate,"  or  "  superstitiously  timid,"  or 
"  conceited,"  who  created  any  contention  about 
difference  of  rites.  With  the  church  at  large, 
then,  there  was  none:  but  they  concurred  with 


*  Sensi  enim  saepe  dolens  et  gemens  multas  infirmorum  perturbatio- 
nes  fievi,  per  quorundam  fratrura  contentiosani  obstinationera,  vel 
superstitiosam  timiditatem,  qui  in  rebus  hujusmodi,  quae  neque  Sci-ip- 
turae  sanctag  auctoritate,  neque  universalis  ecclesioe  traditione ;  neque 
vitse  corrigendaj  utilitate  ad  certum  possunt  terminum  pervenire  (tan- 
tum  quia  subest  qualiscunque  ratiocinatio  cogitantis,  aut  quia  in  sua 
pati-ia  sic  ipse  consuevit,  aut  quia  ibi  vidit,  i\bi  peregrinationem  Suam 
quo  remotiorem  asuis  eo  doctiorem  factam  putat)  tarn  liligiosas  exci- 
tant quaestiones,  lit  nisi  quod  ipsi  faciunt,  nihil  rectum  existiment. 

August,  ep.  118.  ad  eund.  c.II. 


63 

him  in  the  opinion,  that  in  all  such  things  ^'  there 
is  no  course  more  becoming  a  dignified  and  pru- 
dent Christian,  than  to  conform  to  the  practice 
of  that  particular  church  which  he  may  happen 
to  visit."* 

2d.  The  primitive  church  did  not  consider  her 
unity  as  broken,  nor  a  sufficient  cause  of  inter- 
rupting communion  as  afforded^  by  imperfection 
in  her  moral  discipline. 

That  all  the  doctrines,  precepts,  promises,  and 
threatenings  of  God's  word,  and  all  the  institu- 
tions of  his  house,  are  designed  and  calculated 
to  produce  universal  purity  in  heart  and  life, 
admits  of  no  more  doubt  than  the  existence  of 
the  Bible.  For  this  purpose  he  has  invested  the 
go vernours  of  the  church  with  authority,  and  made 
it  their  indispensable  duty,  not  only  to  instruct 
their  people  in  "  whatsoever  things  are  true^ 
honourable,  just,  pure,  lovely,  and  of  good  re- 
port ;"t  but  to  enforce  their  instmctions  by  vigi- 
lant pastoral  inspection,  and  by  moral  coercion 
of  delinquents.  And  for  the  execution  of  this, 
no  less  than  of  every  other,  part  of  their  trust, 


*  Nee  disciplina  ulla  CEt  in  his  melior  gravi  prudentique  Christians, 
cjuam  ut  eo  modo  agat  quo  agere  videdt  Ecclesiam  ad  quamcunque 
Xorte  devenerit.  Augcbt.  %it  sujp, 

t  Pkil.  iv.  8. 


64 

they  shall  render  an  account  to  the  Judge  of  the 
quick  and  dead.  Yet  he  has  himself  informed 
Ihem  that  the  complete  prevention  or  cure  of 
abuses  and  scandals  is  beyond  their  reach — that 
tares  will  be  so  mingled  with  the  wheat  as  to 
render  their  separation,  bj  human  hands,  imprac- 
ticable  without  the  hazard  of  rooting  up  the 
wheat  also — and  that  while,  in  the  ivise  perform- 
ance of  their  duty,  they  are  to  do  the  best 
which  their  circumstances  permit,  they  must  wait 
for  the  entire  purgation  of  the  church  till  the 
second  coming  of  the  Son  of  man,  who  shall  then 
^'  send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather 
out  of  his  kingdom  all  things  that  offend,  and 
them  who  do  iniquity."* 

Nevertheless  there  have  riot  been  wanting  in 
(he  church  of  God  attempts  to  effect  what  hi^ 
word  pronounces  to  be  impossible.  Zeal  with- 
out knowledge — the  generous  but  untrained  ar- 
dour of  juvenile  reformers,  who  can  be  taught 
by  experience  alone,  that  ''  old  Adam  is  too 
hard  for  young  Melancthon" — the  well  meant 
but  visionary  projects  of  recluse  devotion  es- 
tranged from  real  life,  and  from  the  world,  even 
the  Christian  world,  as  it  actually  exists — and, 
not  unfrequently,  that  pragmatical  officiousness 

*  Mat.  xiij.  24—43. 


65 

which  proclaims,  with  Jehu,  "  Come  and  see 
my  zeal  for  the  Lord  !"  and  offers  piles  of  incense 
on  the  altar  of  its  own  vanity,  for  every  shred 
which  it  strews  on  the  altar  of  God — all  these 
things  have  set  men  at  work  to  find  or  to  erect 
an  immaculate  church.  The  success  of  the 
experiment  has  been  worthy  of  its  wit.  But 
though  it  always  has  failed,  and  will  forever  fail, 
of  accomplishing  its  professed  aim  ;  it  never  has 
failed,  and  never  will  fail,  of  producing  one  de- 
plorable consequence.  It  engenders  and  nou- 
rishes a  morbid  humour,  an  unhappy  fastidious- 
ness, which  make  the  religious  temperament  ex- 
tremely irritable  ;  fill  the  mind  with  disgust,  and 
the  mouth  with  complaint ;  and  finally  break  up, 
or  forbid.  Christian  fellowship  under  the  pretence 
of  superior  purity ;  but,  in  very  deed,  for  faults, 
if  not  trivial  in  themselves,  yet  too  often  trivial  in 
comparison  with  the  faults  of  the  complainers. 

But  such  causes  of  disunion  or  disaffection 
between  churches  ;  or  of  the  withdrawing  of 
individuals  from  communion,  provided  nothing 
sinful  be  imposed  on  them,  receive  no  counte- 
nance from  the  judgment  or  example  of  the 
primitive  Christians. 

We  know 'that  grievous  abuses  prevailed  in 
several  even  of  the  ApostoHc  churches — Corinth, 
G  alalia,  Philippi,  Crete.  Ephesus,  Pergamos,  Thy- 


alira,  Sardis,  and  Laodicea,*  were  all  staine3 
in  their  discipline  ;  some  of  them  with  very  foul 
blots,  as  every  one  conversant  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment knows.  They  were  admonished,  reproved, 
threatened,  by  the  Lord  Jesus  himself,  through 
his  servants  Paul  and  John ;  yet  thei;;e  is  not  a 
syllable  enjoining  upon  others  the  disruption  of 
communion  with  them ;  nor  on  the  purer  part  of 
any  of  them  to  withdraw  from  the  more  depraved 
majority.  On  the  contrary,  the  faithful  few  in 
Thyatira  are  simply  encouraged  and  commanded 
to  hold  fast  their  integrity  and  their  testimony.! 
Nor  is  there  a  single  instance  of  Christ's  direct-, 
ing  his  people,  or  any  portion  of  them,  to  break 
off  church  communion  by  their  own  act,  except  in 
the  case  of  their  departure  from  apostate  Rome. 
Now,  although  no  conclusion  can  be  drawn  from 
these  facts  in  favour  of  negligence,  sloth,  or  other 
corruption  in  maintaining  the  law  of  God's  house, 
yet  they  do  show  that,  Christ  Jesus  himself  being 
Judge,  it  is  the  duty  of  Christians  rather  to  en- 
deavour to  rectify  irregularities,  than  by  deserting 
or  disowning  churches  in  which  they  prevail,  to 
remove,  as  much  as  in  them  lies,  the  only  human 


*  Perhaps  we  may  add  the  churches  of  the  dispersion.    See  tU«  ep. 

of  James. 

t  Rev.  il  24. 


67 

restraint  upon  the  career  of  iniquity,  and  suffer  it 
to  "  drown  in  destruction  and  perdition,"  all  the 
remaining  interest  and  glory  of  his  cross. 

By  this  rule  did  the  church  walk  after  the  days 
of  the  Apostles.  Over  the  dishonour  brought 
upon  her  name  by  the  misconduct  of  some  who 
bore  it,  did  the  noblest  of  her  sons  mourn ;  but 
they  never  thought  of  setting  up  separate  com- 
munions. Sore  as  was  their  affliction  on  her 
account,  tliey  did  not,  in  their  haste,  betake 
themselves  to  a  remedy  more  fatal  than  the 
disease.  Their  scrupulousness  on  this  head  was 
the  more  remarkable,  as  there  was  much  greater 
aberration  from  correct  conduct  among  both 
clergy  and  laity,  in  the  third  century,  than  per- 
haps would  be  tolerated  now  in  either  by  any 
evangelical  church.  And  yet  the  most  learned, 
laborious,  holy  men — ^the  most  stern  reprovers  of 
public  declension,  were  the  champions  of  07ie 
.communion ;  and  the  most  strenuous  opposers 
of  schism  and  separation. 

The  Novatian  sect,  which  carried  its  rigour  so 
far  as  to  shut  the  doors  of  readmission  upon  the 
lapsed,"^  however  penitent,  refused  to  hold  com- 


*  "  Lapsed,^^  was  a  term  applied  to  those  who  after  public  reception, 
fey  baptism,  into  the  Christian  church,  had  fallen  into  any  heinous  sini 
^gpfipialljr  shrinking  (torn  their  faith  in  the  time  of  persecution. 


68 

Tnunion  with  the  rest  of  the  church  expressly  on 
account  of  her  alleged  corruptions.  It  was 
against  them  that  Cyprian  wrote  his  treatise  on 
the  Unity  of  the  Church  :  the  whole  bent  of  which 
is  to  show  that  their  separation  was  unscriptural 
and  unlawful ;  and  that  they  who  will  not  hold 
communion  with  all  and  every  part  of  the  Catho- 
lic church,  cast  themselves  out  of  her  pale,  and 
forfeit  their  share  in  her  benefits.  He  ursres  the 
same  doctrine  in  many  of  his  letters.  Take  an 
example : 

"  Although  tares  appear  in  the  church,  neither 
our  faith  nor  our  charity  ought  to  be  so  hindered 
thereby,  as  that  we  should  go  out  of  the  church 
•because  we  perceive  the  tares  to  be  in  it.  Our 
duty  is  to  labour  that  we  may  be  of  the  w^heat ; 
so  that  when  the  wheat  shall  be  gathered  into 
the  Lord's  garner,  we  may  reap  the  fruit  of  our 
work.  The  Apostle  says,  that  in  a  great  house 
there  are  not  only  vessels  of  gold  and  silver ^  but 
also  of  wood  and  of  earth;  and  some  to  honour  and 
some  to  dishonour.  Let  us,  therefore,  do  our  dili- 
gence, and  labour  with  all  our  might,  that  we 
may  be  golden  or  silver  vessels.  But  to  break 
the  earthen  vessels  belongs  only  to  the  Lord,  in 
whose  hands  is  the  rod  of  iron  The  servant 
cannot  be  greater  than  his  master ;  nor  may  any 
one  claim  to  himself  what   the   Father  hath 


69 

given  to  the  Son  alone  ;  so  as  to  imagine  that  he 
possesses  ability  to  ventilate  and  '  purge  the 
floor  ;'  or,  by  human  judgment,  to  separate  uni- 
versally the  tares  from  the  Avheat.  By  such  an 
attempt  men  display  only  a  proud  obstinacy  and 
a  sacrilegious  presumption,  the  effect  of  depraved 
frenzy.  And  while  they  assume  to  themselves 
a  power  beyond  the  claims  of  mild  righteous- 
ness, they  perish  from  the  church.^'* 

The  DoNATiSTS  in  Africa,  treading  in  the  steps 
of  the  Novatians,  set  up  a  sectarian  communion 
upon  the  very  same  pretext.  "  The  church  was 
polluted — there  were  bad  men  in  her  fellow- 


*  Nam  elsi  videntur  in  Ecclesla  esse  zlzania,  non  taraen  impediri 
debet  aut  fides  aut  caritas  nostra,  ut  quoniam  zizania  essoin  Ecclesia 
cernimus,  ipsi  de  Ecclesia  recedamus.  Nobis  tantuinmodo  laborandum 
est  ut  frumentum  esse  possimus,  ut  cum  caeperit  fruraentum  Dominicis 
horreis  condi,  fructum  pro  opere  nostio  et  labore  capiamus.  Apostolus 
in  Epistola  sua  dicit ;  in  domo  autem  magna  non  solum  vasa  sunt  aure.a 
et  argentea,  sed  et  lignea,  et  fictilia,  et  qusedam  quidem  honorata, 
quaedam  vero  inhonorata.  Nos  operam  deraus,  et  quantum  possumu^ 
laboremus,  ut  vas  aureum  vel  argenteum  simus  ;  ceterum  Sctilia  vasa 
confringere  Domino  soli  concessum  est,  cui  et  virga  ferrea  data  est^ 
Esse  non  potest  major  Domino  suo  servus.  Nee  quisquam  sibi  quod 
soli  filio  pater  tribuit,  vindicare  potest ;  ut  putet  aut  ad  aream  venti- 
landam  et  purgandam  palam  ferre  se  jam  posse,  aut  a  fruraento  universa 
zizania  humano  judicio  segregare.  Superba  est  ista  obstinatio  et 
sacrilega  presuratio,  quam  sibi  furor  pravus  assumit :  et  dum  dominium 
•ibi  semper  quidam  plusquam  mitis  justitia  deposcit,  assumunt,  de  Ec* 
flesia  perewnt.  Cyp.  ep,  54. 


70 

ship — their  consciences  would  not  permit  them' 
to  remain,  lest  they  should  be  contaminated." — 
Such  were  the  alleged  reasons  of  their  schisme 
We  know  in  what  light  their  conduct  was  view- 
ed. Augustine,  their  chief  antagonist,  and  a 
formidable  one  he  was,  quotes  Cyprian,  to  prove 
that  he  was  onlj  maintaining  the  doctrine  which 
had  been  maintained  before,  and  was  the  receiv- 
ed doctrine  among  Christians.  "  In  his  letter  to 
Antonianus,"  says  Augustine,  "he  shows  that 
before  the  final  separation  of  the  just  and  the 
unjust,  we  are  in  no  manner  to  withdraw  fro7n  the 
unity  of  the  church  on  account  of  the  commixture 
of  bad  men  with  good^^* — and  then  transcribes  a 
passage  of  the  same  purport,  and  nearly  in  the 
same  words;  though,  if  possible,  still  more 
pointed  than  the  one  above. 

In  another  tract  he  goes  yet  further.     "  I  do 
not  say  that  I  am  to  deny  the  communion  of  the 


*  Cum  enim  ad  Antonianiim  scribens  ostenderet  ante  tempus  ultimae 
separationis  Justorum  et  iniquorum,  nullo  modo  esse  propter  commixtio' 
nem  malorum  ah  ecclesice.  imitate  recedendum  ;  ubi  declarat  quam  sit> 
sanctus,  etilla  quam  meruit  martyrii  claritate  dignissiraus,  ait,  "  Quan- 
tus  arrogantiee  tumor  est ;  quanta  humilitatis  et  lenitatis  oblivio,  et 
arrogantiae  suae  quanta  jactatio,  ut  quis  audeat  aut  facere  se  posse  cre- 
dat,  quod  nee  apostolis  conctessit  Dominus,  ut  zizania  a  frumento  putet 
ie  posse  discernere,"  kc. 

August,  contra  Donatistas,  lib.  TV.  Opp, 
Tom.  vii.  col.  425.  Frobm,  1569. 


n 

Donatists  to  be  of  the  church  of  Christj  because 
some  who  were  bishoj3s  among  them  are  con- 
victed by  ecciesiasticai  and  civil  processes  of 
having  burnt  the  sacred  vohimes — or  because 
they  did  not  carry  their  point  in  the  trial  by  the 
bishops  which  they  craved  from  the  Emperor — 
or  because,  on  their  appeal  to  himself,  they  re- 
ceived from  him  a  sentence  of  condemnation — 
or  because  there  are  among  them  leaders  of  the 
CirciimcelUones — or  because  the  Circumcelliones 
commit  such  atrocious  crimes — or  because  some 
of  them  throw  themselves  headlong  over  preci- 
pices ;  or  rush  into  the  flames  which  they  have 
kindled  for  themselves  ;  or,  by  terrifying  threats, 
compel  others  to  massacre  them,  and  court  so 
many  spontaneous  and  furious  deaths,  that  they 
may  be  revered  as  saints  and  martyrs — or  be- 
cause drunken  herds  of  male  and  female  vasTrants 

o 

flock  to  their  sepulchres,  and  there,  by  day  and 
by  night,  revel  in  wine  and  wickedness,  and  cor- 
rupt themselves  by  the  most  flagitious  enormi- 
ties. Let  all  that  rabble  pass  f()r  their  chaff*,  nor 
be  of  any  prejudice  to  their  wheat,  if  theniselve;^ 
adhere  to  the  church  of  God."* 


*  Nee  ego  dico  ideo  nrihi  esse  credendum,  coraraiinionen)  DoiiHti  non. 
«sse  ecclesiani  Christi,  quia  quidani,(ju*  apndeos  enisconi  fueruiit,  divi- 
sia  instnimenta  igHibus  tratJidisse,  gestis  ecclesiasticis  ct  municipalibus 

10 


72 

He  elsewhere  addresses  the  Donatists  in  this 
animated  style : 

"  You  maintain  that,  by  the  contagion  of 
wicked  Africans,"  (i.  e.  by  holding  communion 
with  the  African  churches,  which  the  Donatists 
pronounced  to  be  too  impure  for  their  fellowship) 
"  by  the  contagion  of  wicked  Africans,  the  church 
has  perished  from  the  face  of  the  earth,  except- 
ing what  remains  in  the  party  of  Donatus,  as  in 
the  ^  wheat'  separated  from  *  tares  and  chaff,' 
against  the  express  declaration  of  Cyprian,  who 
says,  that  neither  do  good  men  perish  from  the 
church  on  account  of  their  commixture  with  the 
bad  ;  nor  can  these  same  bad  men  be  separated 
from  their  mixture  with  the  good  before  the  time 
of  the  divine  Judgment.  You  are,  therefore, 
according  to  your  errour,  or  rather  madness,  com- 


et judiciaiibus  corivincuntur — autquia  injudicio  episcoporum,  quod  ab 
Imperatore  petiverunt,  causam  suam  non  obtinuerunt ;  aut  quia  provo- 
cantes  ad  ipsum  Imperatorem,  etiam  ab  ipso  contrariam  sibi  sententiam 
ineruerunt ;  aut  quia  tales  sunt  apud  eos  Circumcellionum  principes*; 
aut  quia  tuuta  mala  comraittunt  Circumcelliones  ;  aut  quia  sunt  apud 
eos  qui  se  per  abrupta  preecipitent ;  vel  concremando  ignibus  inferant, 
quos  ipsi  sibimet  accenderunt ;  aut  trucidationem  suam  etiam  invitis 
hominibus  terrendo  extorqueant,  et  tot  spontaneas  et  furiosas  mortes, 
ut  colantur  ab  hominibus,  appetant ;  aut  quod  ad  eorum  sepulchra  ebri- 
osi  greges  vagorura  et  vagarum  permixta  nequitia  die  noctuque  se  vino 
sepeliant,  flagitiisque  corrumpant.  Sit  ista  omnis  turba  palea  eorum, 
nee  frumentis  praejudicet  si  ipsi  ecclesiani  tenent. 

De  unit  ate  ecdesicd^  Opp.  T.  VII.  col.  545,  6. 


75 

pelled  to  embrace  in  your  accusation,  all  the 
churches  of  which  we  read  in  the  apostoHc  and 
canonical  scriptures — the  Romans,  Corinthians, 
Galatians,  Ephesians,  Thessalonians,  Colossians, 
Philippians— -the  church  of  Jerusalem,  Antioch, 
Smyrna,  Thyatira,  Sardis,  Pergamos,  Philadel- 
phia, Laodicea — So  many  other  churches  of 
Pontus,  Cappadocia,  Asia,  Bithynia ;  and  all 
that  range  of  country  from  Jerusalem  unto  Illy- 
ricum,  which  Paul  testifies  he  had  filled  with  the 
gospel :  not  to  mention  other  regions  of  wide 
extent,  into  which  the  church,  planted  by  Apos- 
tolic labours,  has  spread  herself,  and  where  she 
has  grown  and  is  growing  still.  Certainly  all  the 
churches  here  enumerated  from  the  holy  scrip- 
tures, situated  so  far  from  Africa,  you  are  obliged 
to  accuse  as  having  perished  through  the  sins  of 
their  African  brethren.  But  the  more  easily  to 
refute  your  errour — even  those  Africans  whose  sin 
you  dare  falsely  to  charge  upon  other  nations — 
even  those  very  Africans,  I  say,  we  are  under  no 
necessity  of  defending.  If  they  are  innocent, 
they  are  sharers  with  those  transmarine  churches 
in  the  kingdom  of  God — If  guilty,  they  share 
with  them  as  tares  with  the  wheat ;  nor  shall 
they  be  able  to  hurt,  in  Africa  itself,  those  who, 
although  knowiimg  their  character^  will  not^  on  their 


n 

account^  separate  themselves  from  the  uniiy  of  the 
church.'^^^ 

Than  this  testimony  nothing  more  ample  and 
decisive  can  be  desired.     It  establishes  the  great 


*Tn  the  above  extract  the  substantial  facts  have  been  regarded  ra- 
ther than  a  scrujmlousiy  literal  translation.  But  lest  any  one  should 
suppose  that  something  more  than  brevity  was  intended,  as  the  wor- 
thy Father,  in  speaking  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  asserts  that  the 
"  Apostle  James  was  her  first  bishop,^*  the  reader  is  presented  with  the 
original  passage  entire. 

Vos  contagione  m^lorum  Aphrorum  periisse  dicitis  de  orbe  terraruni, 
etin  parte  Donati  ejus  reliquias  remansisse,  tanquani  in  frnnientis  a 
zizaniis  et  palea  separatis  ;  contra  Cyprianum  apertissime  sentientes, 
qui  dicit  nee  maloruin  permixtione  bonos  perire  in  ecclesia,  nee  eosdem 
malos  posse  ante  tempus  Judicii  divini  a  bonorum  permixtione  separari. 
Vos  itaque,  secundum  vestrum  errorem  vel  potius  furorem,  accusare 
coginiini  non  solum  Caecdianuni-^t  ordinatores  ejus,  verum  etiam  illas 
ecclesias  quas  in  scripturis  apostolicis  et  canonicis  pariter  legimus; 
Bon  solum  Romanorum,  quo  ex  Aphrica  ordinare  panels  vestris  soletis 
episcopum,  verum  etiam  Coriuthiorum,  Galatarum,  Ephesiorum,  Thes- 
salonicensium,  Colossensium,  Philippensium,  ad  quas  apertissime  scri- 
bit  apostolus  Paulus ;  Herosolyniitanam,  quam  primus  apostolus  Jaco- 
bus episcopatu  suo  rexit.  Antiochensem,  ubi  primo  appellati  sunt 
discipuli  Christiani :  Smyrnensem,  Th  atirensem,  Sardensem,  Perga- 
niensem,  Philadelphiensem,Laodicensem,  ad  quas  est  apocalypsis  apos- 
toli  Joannis.  Tot  alias  ecclesias  Ponti,  Cappadociae,  Asise,  Kithyniae, 
ad  quas  scribit  apostolus  Petrus ;  et  quicquid  alias  se  Paulus  ab  Hieru- 
salem  usque  lilyricum  evangelio  replevisse  testatur  :  ut  taceani  de  aiiis 
tarn  latis  atque  universis  terrarum  partibus,  in  quas,  ex  his  apostolicis 
laboribus  et  plantationibus,  porrecta  crevit  et  crescit  ecclesia.  Istas 
eerte  ecclesias  quas  ex  Uteris  divinis  atque  canonicis  nominavi,  tani 
longe  ab  Aphrica  constitutas,  tanquara  perierint  expeccatis  Aphrico- 
rum,  accusare  cogimini ;  nee  corrlgilis  errorem  qui  vos  ad  tantum  scelus 
nefaria  cUssensione  compellit.     Nos  autera,  ut  istum  errorem  vestrum 


75 

fact,  that  the  principles  and  conduct  of  the  Dona- 
tists  with  regard  to  communion,  Christian  and 
ministerial,  were  at  war  with  thetaith  and  prac- 
tice of  the  whole  church  of  God.  Otherwise 
they  could  not  have  condemned  that  church  as 
having  perished  through  the  corruption  of  her 
unworthy  members,  nor  have  been  themselves 
condemned  as  having  unjustifiably  withdrawn 
from  her  communion.*  And  wherein  their  gene- 
ral principles  and  practice  in  this  matter,  and 
their  reasonings  in  defence  of  ]3oth,  differ  from 
those  of  such  churches  as  will  hold  no  commu- 
nion but  with  the  members  of  their  own  sect,  let 
those  good  and  pure-intentioned  men  who  defend 
the  restriction,  most  solemnly  consider.  In  one 
thing  there  is,  indeed,  a  remarkable  difference. 

facilius  conviiicamus,  iiec  ipsos  Aphros  quorum  fVilso  crimen  in  cffiteras 
etiani  geutes  perfundere  audetis,  nee  ipsos,  inquam,  defender?  cogimur. 
Hahent  etiam  cum  illis  transmarinis  ecclesiis  societatem  rej!;ni  si  inno- 
centps  fuerint;  si  autem  nocentes,  tanquain  zizania  fruniento:  nee  in 
Aphrica  obesse  potuernnt  eis,  qui  se,  propter  illos  etiam  cognitos, 
ah  unitatc  eccleisce  separare  nohterunt. 

August,  contra  Cresconiuni,  Lib.  IIT.  cap.  SB, 
Opp.  Tom.  VII.  col.  244. 

*  Should  it  be  imagined  that  this  reasoning  will  apply  no  less  to  the 
Protestant  reformation  than  to  the  schism  of  the  Donatists ;  it  will  be 
suificient  to  remark,  that  there  was  no  difference  in  radical  doctrwex  of 
faith  ))etween  them  and  the  orthodox,  as  there  was  between  the  Pro- 
testants and  Papal  Rome.  She  poisoned,  by  her  corruptions,  the  wa- 
ters of  the  sanctuary  ;  and  th'-se  who  did  not  choose  to  drink  death  out 
of  her  cup  were  romptlkd  to  retire. 


76 

The  latter  acknowledge  as  true  churches  and 
exemplary  Christians,  many  whose  communion 
they  notwithstanding  reject.  But  the  former  saw 
that  such  a  concession  overturns  the  very  founda- 
tion upon  which  a  separate  communion  is  reared. 
They,  therefore,  carried  their  principles  through ; 
and,  in  order  to  justify  their  schism,  maintained 
tliat  all  but  their  own  had  ceased  to  he  true 
churches.  On  this  head,  the  palm  of  consist- 
ency, at  least,  must  be  awarded  to  the  Donatists  ! 

3d.  Varieties  of  opinion  and  practice,  with 
respect  to  the  modifications  of  her  external  order ^ 
were  not  considered  by  the  primitive  church  as 
inconsistent  with  her  unity. 

That  there  were  such  varieties;  that  the 
government  of  the  church  gradually  altered  from 
the  apostolic  form  ;  and  sooner  in  some  places 
than  in  others ;  so  that  there  were  in  actual 
existence  at  the  same  moment  different  forms  of 
government  in  different  parts  of  the  church,  all 
dissentients  from  the  hierarchy  agree.  If,  from 
the  very  days  of  the  apostles  downwards  for 
more  than  fifteen  hundred  years,  her  order  was 
uninterruptedly  episcopal,  as  many  advocates  of 
episcopacy  maintain;  although  even  such  an 
argument  could  not  be  admitted  against  scriptu- 
ral proof,  yet  it  would  be  extremely  embarrassing 
to  their  opponents.     The  difficulty  of  explaining 


77 

so  strange  a  phenomenon,  would  create  in  con- 
scientious men  a  fear  that  there  must  be  some 
mistake  in  such  a  construction  of  holy  writ  as 
should  be  thwarted  by  it ;  and  incline  their 
minds  to  an  interpretation  with  which  it  should 
be  found  to  accord.  The  difficulty,  however, 
does  not  exist.  Stubborn  facts  in  the  history  of 
the  church  refute  the  episcopal  plea ;  and  prove 
that  her  prelatical  constitution  was  the  result  of 
changes  which  it  required  ages  to  effect. 

It  would  be  foreign  from  our  purpose  to  inves- 
tigate this  proposition  at  large.  Only  a  few 
facts  shall  be  adduced  to  show  that  ii  has  not 
been  lightly  advanced. 

In  the  fourth  century,  Jerome,  "  who,  in  the 
judgment  of  Erasmus,  was,  w  ithout  controversy^ 
by  far  the  most  learned  and  most  eloquent  of  all 
the  Christians,  and  the  prince  of  Christian  di- 
vines,"* taught  the  same  thing.  His  testimony, 
and  the  substance  of  the  reasoning  upon  it,  are 
extracted  from  the  second  volume  of  the  Chris- 
tian's Magazine. 

"  Thus  he  lays  down  both  doctrine  3,nd  fact  re- 
lative to  the  government  of  the  church,  in  his. 
commentary  on  Titus,  i.  5. 

"  That  thou  shouldest  ordain  Presbyters  in  every 

*  Cave,  Uis,  LiU. Script.  Eccks,  p.  171.    Ed.  1720. 


78 

ciiy^  as  I  had  appointed  thee,*     '  What  sort  of 
Presbyters  ought  to  be  ordained  he  shows  after- 


*  "  Qui  qualis  Presbyter  debeat  ordinari,  in  consequentibus  disse- 
rens  hoc  ait :  Si  qiiis  est  sine  criniine,  unius  uxoris  vir,"  et  ceetera : 
postea  intulit,  "  Opoilet  n.  Episcopuni  sine  crimine  esse,  tanquam 
Deidfspensatorem."  Idem  est  ergo  Presbyter  ,  qui  et  Episcopus  :  et 
antequau!,  diaholi  inslinctu.  studia  in  religione  tierent,  et  diceretur  in  po- 
pulis  :  "  Ego  sum  Pauli,  ego  Apollo,  ego  autera  Cephse  -Pcommuni  Pres- 
bylerorum  consilio  ecclesiaj  gubernabantur.  Postquam  vero  unusquis- 
que  eos,  quos  baptizaverat,  suos  putabat  esse,  non  Christi :  in  toto  orbe 
decretum  est,  ui  unus  de  Presbyteris  elecius  super poneretur  ccderis,  ud 
qnejn  ornnis  ecclesm  cura  pertineret,  et  schisuiatuni  semina  tollerentur. 
Putet  aliquis  non  scripturarum,  sed  nostrani,  esse  sententiam  Episco- 
pum  et  Presbyterum  unura  esse;  et  aliud  ffitatia,  aliud  esse  nomen  offi- 
<;ii :  relegat  Apostoli  ad  Philippenses  verba  dicentis  :  Paulus  et  Ti- 
tiiolheus  servi  Jesu  Christi,  omnibus  Sanctis  in  Christo  Jesu,  qui  sunt 
Phillippis,  cum  episcopis  et  Biaconis,  gratia  vobis  etpax,  et  reliqua. 
Phiilippi  una  est  urbs  Macedoniae  :  et  certe  in  una  civitate  p/i£ res  ut 
nuncupantur  Episcopi  esse  non  poferant.  Sed  quia  eosdtm  Episcopos  ills 
iempore  quos  et  Preshyieros  appellabant,  propterea  indiiferenter  de 
Episcopis  quasi  de  Presbyteris  est  locutos.  Adhuc  hoc  ajicui  videa- 
lur  ambiguutu,  r\isi  altero  testimonio  comprobetur.  In  Actibus  Apos- 
iolorum  scriptum  est,  quod  cum  venisset  Apostolus  Miletum,  raiserit 
Ephesum,  et  vocaverit  Presbyteros  ecclesise  ejusdem,  quibus  postea 
inter  csetera  sit  iocutus  :  attendlte  vobis,  et  omni  gregi  in  quo  vos  Spiritus 
sarichis  posuit  Episcopos,  pascere  ecdesiam  Domini  quam  ucquisivit  per 
san<-uinem  suum.  Et  hoc  dil'.gentius  observate,  quo  mode  unius  cirita- 
tis  Ephesi  Presbyteros  vocans,  postea  eosdem  Episcopos  dixerit— Haec 
propterea,  ut  ostentleremus  apud  veteres  eosdem  fuisse  Presbyteros  quo* 
•et  Episcopos. "  Paulatim  vero,  ut  dissensionum  plantaria  evellerentur, 
ad  wium  omnem  solicitudinem  esse  delatam. — Sicut  ergo  Presbyteri 
sciunt  se  ex  ecclesite  consuetudhie  ei,  qui  sibi  propositus  fuerlt,  esse  sub- 
jeclos,  ita  Episcopi  noveriut  se  vmi^is  consmtudine  quam  disposiiionis 
domiidcec  terUak,  Presbyteris  esse  majores. 

HiERONYMi  Com.  in  Til.  I.  i.  0pp.  Tom.yj- 
p.  168.  cd.  Victorii,  Paris,  1623.  FoL 


wards — If  any  be  blameless^  the  husband  of  one 
wfe^  Sic.  and  then  adds, /or  a  bishop  must  be  blame- 
less,  as  the  steward  of  God^  &c.  A  Presbyter^  there- 
fore, is  the  same  as  a  bishop :  and  before  there 
were,  by  the  instigation  of  the  devil,  parties  in  re- 
ligion ;  and  it  was  said  among  dilferent  peo- 
ple, /  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Ce- 
phas, the  churches  were  governed  bj  the  joint 
counsel  of  the  Presbyters.  But  afterwards,  when 
every  one  accounted  those  w  horn  he  baptized  as 
belonging  to  himself  and  not  to  Christ,  it  was  de- 
creed throughout  the  ivhole  ivorld,  that  one,  chosen 
from  among  the  Presbyters,  should  be  put  over 
the  rest,  and  that  the  whole  care  of  the  church 
should  be  committed  to  him,  and  the  seeds  of 
schisms  taken  away. 

'  Should  any  one  think  that  this  is  my  private 
opinion,  and  not  the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures, 
let  him  read  the  words  of  the  apostle  in  his  epis- 
tle to  the  Philippians  ;  '  Paul  and  Timotheus,  the 
servants  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  all  the  saints  in  Christ 
Jesus  which  are  at  Philippi,  wdth  the  bishops  and 
deacons,'  &c.  Philippi  is  a  single  city  of  Mace- 
donia ;  and  certainly  in  one  city  there  could  not 
be  several  bishops,  as  they  are  now  styled  ;  but  as 
they,  at  that  time,  called  the  very  same  person3 
bishops  whom  they  called  Presbyters,  the  Apos- 

n 


80 

tie  has  spoken  without  distinction  of  bishops  as 
Presbyters. 

'  Should  this  matter  yet  appear  doubtful  to 
any  one,  unless  it  be  proved  by  an  additional 
testimony ;  it  is  written  in  the  acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles, that  when  Paul  had  come  to  Miletum,  he 
sent  to  Ephesus  and  called  the  Presbyters  of  that 
church,  and  among  other  things  said  to  them, 
^  take  heed  to  yourselves  and  to  all  the  flock  in 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  hath  made  you  bishops.' 
Take  particular  notice,  that  calling  the  Presby- 
ters of  the  single  city  of  Ephesus,  he  afterwards 
names  the  same  persons  Bishops.'  After  fur- 
ther quotations  from  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
and  from  Peter,  he  proceeds  :  '  Our  intention  in 
these  remarks  is  to  show  that  among  the  ancients, 
Presbyters  and  Bishops  were  the  very  saivie.  But 
that  BY  little  and  little,  that  the  plants  of  dis- 
sentions  might  be  plucked  up,  the  whole  concern 
was  devolved  upon  an  individual.  As  the  Pres- 
byters, therefore,  know  that  they  are  subjected, 

BY  THE    CUSTOM  OF  THE  CHURCH,    tO    him  who   is 

set  over  them  ;  so  let  the  Bishops  know,  that 
they  are  greater  than  Presbyters  more  by  custom 
than  by  any  real  appointment  of  christ.' 

"  He  pursues  the  same  argument  with  great 
point,  in  his  famous  epistle  to  Evagrius,  asserting 
and  proving  from  the  Scriptures,  that  in  the  be- 


81 

ginning,  and  during  the  Apostles'  days,  a  Bishop 
and  a  Presbyter  were  the  same  thing.  He  then 
goes  on  :  'As  to  the  fact,  that  afterwards  one 
was  ELECTED  to  preside  over  the  rest,  this  was 
done  as  a  remedy  against  schism  ;  lest  every  one, 
drawing  his  proselytes  to  himself,  should  rend 
the  church  of  Christ.  For  even  at  iVlexandria, 
from  the  Evangelist  Mark  to  the  Bishops  Hera- 
clas  and  Dionysius,  the  Presbyters  always  chose 
one  of  their  number,  placed  him  in  a  superior 
station,  and  gave  him  the  title  of  Bishop  :  in  the 
same  manner  as  if  an  army  should  make  an  em- 
peror ;  or  the  deacons  should  choose  from  among 
themselves,  one  whom  they  knew  to  be  particu- 
larly active,  and  should  call  him  arch-deacon. 
For,  excepting  ordination,  Avhat  is  done  by  a 
Bishop  which  may  not  be  done  by  a  Presbyter  ? 
Nor  is  it  to  be  supposed,  that  the  church  should 
be  one  thing  at  Rome,  and  another  in  all  the 
world  besides.  Both  France,  and  Britain,  and 
Africa,  and  Persia,  and  the  East,  and  India,  and 
all  the  barbarous  nations,  worship  one  Christ,  ob- 
serve one  rule  of  truth.  If  you  demand  authori- 
ty, the  globe  is  greater  than  a  city.  Wherever  a 
Bishop  shall  be  found,  whether  at  Rome,  or  Eu- 
o'ubiiim,  or  Constantinople,  or  Rhegium,  or  Alex- 


m 

andria,  or  Tanis,  he  has  the  same  pretensions, 
the  same  priesthood.'*      Observe, 

''  1.  Jerome  expressly  denies  the  superiority  of 
Bishops  to  Presbyters,  by  divine  right  To  prove 
his  assertion  on  this  head,  he  goes  directly  to  the 
scriptures  ;  and  argues,  as  the  advocates  of  pari- 
ty do,  from  the  interchangeable  titles  of  Bishop 
and  Presbyter ;  from  the  directions  given  to  them 
without  the  least  intimation  of  difference  in  their 
authority ;  and  from  the  powers  of  Presbyters, 
undisputed  in  this  day. 

"  2.  Jerome  states  it  as  a  historical  fact^  that, 
in  the  original  constitution  of  the  church,  before 
the  devil  had  as  much  influence  as  he  acquired 
aftervv^ards,  the  churches  ivere  governed  by  the  joint 
counsels  of  the  Presbyters. 


*  Ctuod  autem  postea  umis  ehclus  est,  qui  ca:;teri3  prjeponeretur,  in 
echisiuatis  reraediura  factum  est :  ne  unusquisque  ad  se  trahens  Christi 
Ecclesiam  rumperet.  Nam  et  Alexandrise  a  Marco  Evangelista  usque 
ad  Heraclam  et  Dionysium  Episcopos,  semper  unum  ex  se  selectum,  in  ex- 
cebiori  gradu  collocatum^  Episcopum  nominabant :  quoniodo  si  exercittis 
imperatorem/flcjfl/ ;  aut  diaconi  eligant  de  se,  quern  industrlnm  novcrint. 
et  archidlaccnwn  vocent.  Quid  enim  faclt,  excepta  ordinatione,  Episcopus. 
quodi presb}/lcr  non facial?  Nee  altera  Romana?  urbis  Ecclcsia, altern 
totius  orbis  existimauda  est.  Et  GallisB,  et  Brittania?,  et  Africa,  et 
Persis,  et  Orient,  et  India,  et  ouines  barbarae  nationes  unura  Christum 
adorant,  uuam  observant  regulam  veritatis.  Si  auctoritas  qunsritur,  or- 
bis major  est  urbe  Ubicumque  fuerit  Episcopus,  sive  Romae,  sive  Eu- 
giibii,  sive  Constant-nopoli,  sive  Rhegii,  sive  Alexandria},  sive  Tanis  : 
ejusdem  meriti,  ejusdem  et  sacerdotii.      Ilkrcn.     Opp.  T.  II.  p.  C54 


83 

"  3,  Jerome  states  it  as  a  historical  fact^  that 
this  government  of  the  churches,  hy  Presbyters 
alone,  continued  until,  for  the  avoiding  of  scan- 
dalous quarrels  and  schisms,  it  was  thought  ex- 
pedient to  alter  it.  '  Afterwards,''  says  he,  '  when 
every  one  accounted  those  whom  he  baptized  as 
belonging  to  himself  and  not  to  Christ,  it  was 
decreed  throughout  the  ivhole  ivorld,  that  one, 
chosen  from  among  the  Presbyters,  should  be 
put  over  the  rest ;  and  that  the  whole  care  of  the 
church  should  be  committed  to  him.' 

"  4.  Jerome  states  it  as  a  historical  fact,  that 
this  change  in  the  government  of  the  church — 
this  creation  of  a  superiour  order  of  ministers,  took 
place,  not  at  once,  but  by  degrees — '  Paulatim,' 
says  he,  '  by  little  and  litde.'  The  precise  date 
on  which  this  innovation  upon  primitive  order 
eommenced,  he  does  not  mention ;  but  he  says 
positively,  that  it  did  not  take  place  till  the  fac- 
.tious  spirit  of  the  Corinthians  had  spread  itself 
in  different  countries,  to  an  alarming  extent.  'In 
populis,^  is  his  expression.  Assuredly,  this  was 
not  the  work  of  a  day.  It  had  not  been  accom- 
plished when  the  apostolic  epistles  were  written, 
because  Jerome  appeals  to  these  for  proof  that 
the  churches  were  then  governed  by  the  joint 
counsels  of  Presbyters  ;  and  it  is  incredible  that 
5uch  ruinous  dissentions.  had  they  existed,  should 


84 

not  have  been  noticed  in  letters  to  others  beside 
the  Corinthians.  The  disease,  indeed,  was  of  a 
nature  to  spread  rapidly;  but  still  it  must  have  had 
time  to  travel.  With  all  the  zeal  of  Satan  him- 
self, and  of  a  parcel  of  wicked  or  foolish  clergy- 
men to  help  him,  it  could  not  march  from  people 
to  people,  and  clime  to  clime,  but  in  a  course  of 
years. 

"  5.  Jerome  states  as  historical  facts,  that  the 
elevation  of  one  Presbyter  over  the  others,  was 
a  human  contrivance ; — was  not  imposed  by  au- 
thority, but  crept  in  by  custom; — and  that  the 
Presbyters  of  his  day  knew  this  very  well.  '  As, 
therefore,''  says  he,  ^  the  Presbyters  kjnow  that  they 
are  subjected  to  their  superiour  by  custom  ;  so  let  the 
bishops  know  that  they  are  above  the  Presbyters,  ra- 
ther by  the  custom  of  the  church,  than  by  the 
Lord^s  appointment,^ 

"  6.  Jerome  states  it  as  a  historical  fact,  that 
the  first  bishops  were  made  by  the  Presbyters 
themselves ;  and  consequently  they  could  neither 
have,  nor  communicate  any  authority  above  that 
of  Presbyters.  '  Afterwards,^  says  he,  ^  to  prevent 
schism,  one  was  elected  to  preside  over  the  rest.' 
Elected  and  commissioned  by  whom  ?  By  the 
Presbyters  :  for  he  immediately  gives  you  a  broad 
fact  which  it  is  impossible  to  explain  away. 
^  At  Alexandria^'  he  tells  you,  '  from  the  evange- 


85 

list  Mark,  to  the  Bishops  Heraclas  and  Dionysi- 
us,'  i.  e.  till  about  the  middle  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, '  the  Presbyters  always  chose  one  of  their 
number,  placed  him  in  a  superior  station^  and  gave 
him  the  title  of  Bishop? 

''  7.  Jerome  states  it  as  a  historical  fact^  that 
even  in  his  own  day,  that  is,  toward  the  end  of 
the  fourth  centur}'',  there  was  no  power,  except- 
ing ordination,  exercised  by  a  Bishop,  which 
might  not  be  exercised  by  a  Presbyter.  '  What 
does  a  Bishop,'  he  asks,  '  excepting  ordination, 
which  a  Presbyter  may  not  do  ?' 

"  Two  observations  force  themselves  upon  us. 

"  1st.  Jerome  challenges  the  whole  world,  to 
show  in  what  prerogative  a  Presbyter  was,  at 
that  time,  inferiour  to  a  Bishop,  excepting  the  sin- 
gle power  of  ordination.  A  challenge  which 
common  sense  would  have  repressed,  had  pub- 
lic opinion  concerning  the  rights  of  Presbyters 
allowed  it  to  be  successfully  met. 

"  2d.  Although  it  appears  from  Jerome  himself, 
that  the  prelates  were  not  then  in  the  habit  of  as- 
sociating the  Presbyters  with  themselves,  in  an 
equal  right  of  government,  yet,  as  he  told  the  for- 
mer, to  their  faces,  that  the  right  was  undeniable, 
and  ought  to  be  respected  by  them,  it  presents 
u&  with  a  strong  fact  in  the  progress  of  Episco- 
pacy.    Here  was  a  power  in  Presbyters,  which, 


86 

though  undisputed,  lay,  for  the  most  part,  dor- 
mant. The  transition  from  disuse  to  denial,  and 
from  denial  to  extinction,  of  powers  which  tb-e 
possessors  have  not  vigilance,  integrity,  or  spirit 
to  enforce,  is  natural,  short,  and  rapid.  Accord- 
ing to  Jerome's  declaration,  the  hierarchy  did 
not  pretend  to  the  exclusive  right  of  government. 
Therefore,  there  was  but  Aa/f  a  hierarchy,  accord- 
ing to  the  present  system.  That  the  Bishops  had. 
some  time  after,  the  powers  of  ordination  and 
government  both,  is  clear.  How  did  they  acquire 
the  monopoly  ?  By  apostolic  institution  ?  No. 
Jerome  refutes  that  opinion  from  the  Scriptures 
and  history.  By  apostolic  tradition  ?  No.  For^ 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century,  their  sin- 
gle prerogative  over  Presbyters  was  the  power  of 
ordination.  Government  was  at  first  exercised 
by  the  Presbyters  in  common.  When  they  had,  by 
their  own  act,  placed  a  superiour  over  their  own 
heads,  they  rewarded  his  distinction,  his  toils,  and 
his  perils,  with  a  proportionate  reverence  ;  they 
grew  slack  about  the  maintenance  of  trouble- 
some privilege  ;  till  atlength  their  courtesy,  their 
indolence,  their  love  of  peace,  or  their  hope  of 
promotion,  permitted  their  high  and  venerable 
trust  to  glide  into  the  hands  of  the  prelates.  We 
have  no  doubt  that  the  course  of  the  ordaming 
^ouTr  was  similar,  though  swifter.''^ 


87 

^  "  This  testimony  of  Jerome  is  seconded  by  a 
more  full  one  of  Eutychius,  Patriarch  of  Alex- 
andria, who,  out  of  the  Records  and  Traditions 
©f  that  church,  in  his  Arabick  Originals  thereof, 
saith,  (according  to  Selden's  Translation  in  his 
Comment,  p.  29,  30.)  ^  Mark  the  Evangelist 
ordained,  along  with  Hananias,  twelve  Presby- 
ters, who  were  always  to  remain  with  the  Patri- 
arch ;  so  that  when  the  Patriarchate  should  be 
vacant,  they  should  elect,  from  the  twelve  Pres- 
byters, one  on  whose  head  the  other  eleven  should 
impose  their  hands  and  bless  him^  and  create  him 
Patriarch :  and  then  should  choose  some  other 
distinguished  man,  as  a  fellow  Presbyter,  in  the 
place  of  him  who  was  thus  made  Patriarch,  so 
that  their  number  should  always  be  twelve.  Nor 
did  this  institution  concerning  the  Presbyters, 
viz.  that  the  Patriarch  should  he  created  from  these 
Presbyters^  go  into  disuse  before  the  time  of  Alex- 
ander, Patriarch  of  Alexandria^  318.  We  for- 
bad the  Presbyters  to  create  a  Patriarch  from 
that  time  :  and  decreed,  that  on  tbe  deaih  of  one 
Patriarch,  the  Bishops  should  meet  and  ordaia 


*  In  the  following  extract  from  Br.  Owen's  Plea  for  Scripture  ordf' 
nation^  the  Latin  quotations  are  translated  by  the  author  of  this  work, 
for  the  benefit  of  the  unlearned  reader ;  and  the  ^uotatioHS  thews^vfg 
thrown  into  the  wargiH. 

12 


88 

his  successor.  He  also  decreed  that,  in  case  oi 
a  vacancy,  they  should,  without  regard  to  place, 
choose  either  from  among  these  twelve  Presby- 
ters or  any  others,  some  man  of  peculiar  Avorth, 
and  give  him  the  title  of  Patriarch.  And  thus 
vanished  that  more  ancient  institutio^i^  according  to 
which  the  Patriarch  used  to  he  created  by  Presby- 
ters ;  and  in  its  place  came  the  above  decree  for 
creating  him  by  Bishops,"^^ 

"  Here  is  a  full  proof  of  Presbyters  choosing 
and  creating  their  Bishop,  (whom  Eutychius, 
speaking  in  the  language  of  his  age,  calls  Patri- 
arch,) and  that  by  imposition  of  hands  and  bene- 
diction, or  prayer,  without  any  other  consecra- 
tion :  which  custom  continued  several  ages,  until 


*  *  Constituit  item  Marcus  Evangelista  duodecim  Presbyteros  cum 
Hanania,  qui  semper  manerent  cum  Patriarcha,  adeoutcum  vacaret 
Patriarchatus  eligerent  unum  e  duodecim  Presbyteris,  cujus  capiii  reli- 
qui  imdecim  manus  imp  oner  ent .  eumque  henedicercnty  et  Patriarcham  eum 
crearent :  et  dein  virum  alkjuem  insigneni  eligerent,  eumque  Presbyte- 
rumsecura  constituerent,  loco  ejus  qui  sic  factus  est  Patriarcha,  ita  ut 
semper  extareut  duodecim.  Neque  desili  Alex ANDRiiE  instiiutum  hoc  de 
Presbyteris^  ut  scilicet  PairiarchiE  crearent ur  e  Presbyteris  duodecim,  us- 
que  ad  tempora  Alexandri  Patriarchce  Alexandrini,  quifuit  ex  numero 
illo  318.  Is  autem  vetuit,  ne  deinceps  Patriarcham  Presbyteri  crearent, 
et  decrevit  ut,  mortuo  Patriarcha,  convenirent  Episcopi  qui  Patriar- 
cham ordinarent.  Decrevit  item  ivt,  vacante  Patrlarchatu,  eligerent 
sive  ex  quacumque  regione,  sive  ex  duodecim  iilis  Presbyteris,  sive 
alii§,  ut  res  ferebat,  virum  aliquem  eximium,  eumque  Patriarcham  vo- 
carent ;  aitque  ita  evanuit  institutum  illud  antiqui^is,  quo  creari  solitus  a 
Presbyteris  Patriarcha,  §1  sucussii  in  locum  ejus  decretum  de  Patriarcho 
ab  Episcvpis  crsfindo.* 


■^  ". 


89 

at  last  the  neighbouring  Bishops  usurped  the 
power  of  consecration,  and  left  the  Presbjters 
neither  the  choice  nor  the  creation  of  their 
l^ishop. 

"  Here  we  have  also  an  instance  of  Presbyters 
making  Presbyters ;  for  Eutychius  tells  us,  that 
the  same  Presbyters  that  made  their  Bishop, 
chose  and  ordained  another  person  Presbyter  in 
his  room  ;  and  so  constituted  both  Presbyters  and 
Bishops  for  several  asres  together. 

"  The  Bishop  of  Worcester*  tells  us,  out  of 
Johannes  Cassianus,  that  about  the  year  390,  one 
Abbot  Daniel,  inferior  to  none  in  the  desart  Sce- 
tis,was  made  a  Deacon  '  by  Paphnutius,  a  Pres- 
byter of  the  same  retreat ;  for  so  greatly  was  he 
charmed  with  the  abbot's  virtues,  that  he  was 
eager  to  associate  with  himself  in  the  honour  of 
the  Priesthood  also,  one  w  hom  he  knew  to  be 
his  own  equal  in  the  excellence  of  his  life.  Un- 
able, therefore,  to  bear  the  thought  that  he  should 
remain  any  longer  in  the  inferior  order  of  the 
ministry,  and  anxious  to  provide  for  himself  a 
most  worthy  successor,  he  promoted  Daniel,  dur- 
ing his  own  lifetime,  to  the  honour  of  the  Pres- 
byterial  office.f 


*    Stilling.  Iren.  p.  380. 

t  A  B.  Paphnutio  solitudinis  ejusdem  Presbytero  ;  in  tantum  enini 
v'irtutibus  ejus  adgaudebat,  lit  quem  vitae  mentis  sibi  ct  gratia  jiarqm 


90 

"  Here  is  a  Presbyter  ordained  by  a  Presbyter, 

which  we  no  where  read  was  pronounced  null 

by  Theophilus,  then  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  or 

any  other  of   that  time.     Had  it   been   either 

irregular   or    unusual,  doubtless    it    had    been 

censured. 

*     -:t     *     4«-     * 

"  The  power  of  ordination  and  government 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  captive  Presbyters,  un- 
der the  Scythians  beyond  Ister,  for  about  seventy 
years,  from  the  year  260,  to  the  year  327 ;  the 
former  being  the  year  of  their  captivity  under 
Galienus,  the  latter  of  the  change  of  the  govern- 
ment under  Constantine,  when  Urphilas  was 
created  Bishop  by  Euscbius,  and  others.* 

*        *        -X-        -X-        -K- 

"  Hilary,  or  whoever  was  the; Author  in  Q.  ex 
utroque  Test,  mixtini,  aflirms.  That  in  Alexan- 
dria, and  throughout  all  Egypt,  if  a  bishop  be 
wanting,  a  presbyter  consecrates.!  It  cannot  be 
said  that  "consecrate"  here  sioiiifies  the  con- 
secration  of  the  eucharist,   for  this   might     be 


ueverat,  coacquare  sibi  etiam  Sacerdotli  honore  festinaret.  Siquideni 
liequaquara  ferens  in  infcrioreeum  ministerio  diutins  immorari,  optans- 
que  sibimet  successionem  dignissimara  providere,  superstes  cum  Pres* 
byterii  honore  provexit. 

*  Philosiorg.  lib.  2.  cap.  5.  in  Blond.  Apol. 

t  In  Alexandria  et  per  lotani  iEgyptuni  si  desitEpiscopus,consecra( 
Presbyter.    Ql,%  101. 


91 

done  by  the  Presbyter  when  the  Bishop  was 
present.*  If  it  be  taken  for  confirmation,  it  doth 
not  prejudice  our  cause  5  for  the  Canon  Umits  the 
power  of  confirmation  as  well  as  ordination  to 
the  Bishop,  as  was  also  the  power  of  consecra- 
ting churches^  if  any  should  take  the  word  in  that 
sense. 

"  We  may  understand  the  meaning  by  a  pa- 
rallel place  of  Hilary  in  Ambrose,  who  thus 
.speaks  :t 

"  The  writings  of  the  Apostle"  (Paul)  "  do 
not  in  all  things  agree  with  the  ordination  which 
is  now  in  the  church :  for  even  Timothy,  (1  Tim. 
4,  12.  2  Tim.  16.  a  Presbyter  created  by  him- 
self) he  calls  '  Bishop  ;'  because  the  Presby- 
ters were  originally  called  Bishops  ;  so  that  as 
one  left  the  office,  another  who  was  next  to  him 
should  take  his  place.  Finally,  the  Presbyters 
in  Egypt  do,  at  this  day,  consecrate  if  a  Bishop 
be  not  present.  But  because  the  Presbyters, 
who  followed  next  in  order,  began  to  be  found 
unworthy  of  holding  the  first  rank ;  the  mode 
was  changed  by  the  care  of  a  council,  so  that 
not  the  order  of  rotation,  but  merit,  should  make 
a  Bishop,  when  constituted  by  the  judgment  of  a 
number  of  priests ;  lest  an  unfit  person  should 

*  Prapsente  Episcopo.  t  Corament.  in  Eph.  4. 


92 

syeize  the  office  at  randonij  and  be  a  scandal  to 
man}."* 

"  The  same  Author  saith  also,  m  Tim,  3.  "  Af- 
ter the  Bishop  he  subjoins  the  order  of  the  Dea- 
con, For  what  other  reason  than  this,  that  a 
Bishop  and  Presbyter  have  the  same  ordination. 
For  each   of  them  is  a  priest,  but  the  Bishop  is 

first."t 

"  Here  note, 

"  1.  That  the  ordination  in  Hilary's  time  did 
not  in  all  things  agree  with  the  writings  of  the 
Apostle.  That  he  speaks  of  the  ordination  of 
Ministers  is  evident  by  the  following  words  : 
"  A  Presbyter  created  by  himself." 

"  2.  At  first,  Presbyters  and  Bishops  were  of 
tlie  same  order  and  office,  and  had  but  one  ordi- 


*  Ideo  non  per  omnia  conveniunt  scripta  Apostoli  Ordinationi  quae 
"Runc  in  Ecclesia  est,  quia  ha^c  inter  ipsa  priniordia  sunt  scripta  ;  nam 
et  Timotheum  (1  Tim.  4,  14.  2  Tim.  1,  5.  Presby terum  a  se  creatum) 
Episcopum  vocat,  quia  primum  Presbyteri  Episcopi  appellabantur,  ut 
recedente  uno,  sequens  ei  succedcret.  Denique  apud  jEgyptum  Pres- 
byteri consignant,  si  praesens  non  sit  Episcopus.  Sed  quia  cceperunt 
sequentes  Presbyteri  indigni  inveniri  ad  primatus  tenendos,  immutata 
est  ratio  prospiciente  Concilio,  ut  non  Ordo,  sed  meritum  crearet  Epis- 
copum,  multoruni  Sacerdotum  judicio  constitutum,  ne  indignus  temere 
Msurparet,  et  esset  multis  scandalum. 

t  Hilar.  Diac.  in  Tim.  S.  Post  Episcopum,  Diaconi  Ordinem  subjicit. 
Cluare,  nisi  quia  Episcopi  et  Prfesbyterl  una  Ordinatio  est  .^  Utfr- 
♦jue   enini  Saceidos  est,  sed  Episcopus  primus  csL 


93 

aation.  "  The  ordination  of  a  Bishop  and  Pres- 
byter is  the  same,"  which  shows  the  meaning 
of  "  Ordinatio"  in  the  former  paragraph.  The 
Bishop,  in  Hilary's  time,  which  was  about  the 
year  380,  under  Damasus,*  was  but  primus  Sa- 
cerdos,  (first  priest,)  "and  not  of  a  superior 
order :  Peter  is  called  '^^'^roc,  primus  Apostolus, 
(first  Apostle)  Matth.  10,  2.  and  yet  Protestants 
hold  all  the  Apostles  to  be  equal. 

"  3.  Spalatensist  infers  from  this  quotation, 
that  at  the  beginning,  when  a  Bishop  died,  there 
was  not  so  much  as  an  election  of  him  that  was 
to  succeed,  (much  less  any  new  ordination,)  but 
the  eldest  Presbyter  came  into  the  room  of  the 
deceased  Bishop.  See  the  preface  to  BlondePs 
Apology,  p.  1 1,  and  31. 

"  4.  There  was  a  change  in  the  way  of  choos- 
ing their  Bishop  ;  "  that  not  order,"  viz.  order  of 
rotation,  "  but  merit,  should  make  a  Bishop." 

*       *       ^e      *      * 

"  5.  After  this  change  the  Presbyters  chose 
and  made  their  Bishop ;  for  so  Hilarius  affirms 
him  to  be — "  Constituted  by  the  judgment  of  a 
number  of  Priests." 

"  6..  He  adds,  that  in  Egypt,  "  the  Presbyters 
consecrate,  if  no  Bishop  be  present."   He  speaks 


Uihr.  t  De  Repub.  Ecclea.  1. 3.  c.  S. 


94 

in  the  foregoing  words  of  the  identity  of  Bishops 
and  Presbyters,  and  he  brings  this  as  a  confirina- 
tion  of  it,  that  in  the  absence  of  the  Bishop  they 
might  do  those  things  which  custom  had  appro- 
priated to  the  Bishops.  "  Consignare,"  is  some  act 
pf  prerogative  that  the  Bishops  challenged  to 
themselves,  which  yet  in  their  absence  the  Pres- 
byters might  perform.  Whether  we  understand 
it  of  ordination  or  confirmation,  in  which  they 
did  '  Chrismate  consignare,'  it  is  not  material,  for 
both  were  reserved  to  the  Bishop  by  the  Canons. 
Though  by  comparing  this  with  the  scope  of  Hi- 
lary's discourse,  and  with  the  quotation  out  of 
the  questions  under  Austin's  name,  '  If  a  Bishop 
be  wanting,  a  Presbyter  conpecrates,'  it  should 
seem  evidently  meant  of  ordination ;  especially 
when  we  find  "  consignare"  to  be  taken  for  "  con- 
secrare"  in  several  authors,  Arnob.  lib.  3.  Cypr. 
Ep.  2.  Tu  tantum  quem  jam  Spiritalibus  castris 
caelestis  militia  signavit."* 

To  close  this  article.  A  Diocese,  i.  e.  a  dis- 
trict under  the  government  of  a  single  Bishop, 
contained,  in  the  fourth  century,  a  large  number 
of  congregations,  and  could  not  possibly  be  ser- 
ved by  the  ministrations  in  word,  sacraments, 


*  OwEiv's  PZea,  &c.  p.  128—140. 


95 

and  family  inspection,  by  a  single  man.  Some 
episcopal  sees  were  of  great  extent.  That  of 
Augustine,  Bishop  of  Hippo,  was  no  less  than 
forty  miles  long.*  Summarily,  Bishops,  in  those 
days,  w^ere  a  sort  of  ecclesiastical  princes,  having 
thousands  and  ten  thousands  of  ecclesiastical 
subjects  under  their  juiisdiction.  This  will  not 
be  disputed.  But  a  primitive  Bishop  and 
bishoprick  were  quite  other  matters;  the  declara- 
tion of  Mr.  Bingham  to  the  contrary  notwith- 
standing.! We  have  yet,  among  what  are  ac- 
counted the  genuine  epistles  of  Ignatius,  a  let- 
ter to  his  friend  Poi.ycarp  Bishop  of  Smyrna, 
and  a  cotemporary  of  the  Apostle  John.  In  that 
letter  he  gives  the  following  advice  to  Polycar|3, 
with  regard  to  the  exercise  of  his  episcopal  func- 
tions : 

"  Let  not  the  widows  be  neglected.  Next  to 
the  Lord,  do  thou  exercise  care  over  them.  Let 
nothing  be  done  without  thy  sanction — Let  your 
assemblies  be  held  frequently.  Inquire  after  all 
by  name.     Do  not  overlook  the  men  and  maid  ser- 

*  Bingham,  Orig.  Ecdes.  B.  IX.  ch.  2.  Vol.  I.  p.  352.  Fol. 

t  This  very  learned  Divine  says,  that  the  "  cliurch,  in  settling  the 
bounds  of  Dioceses,"  according  to  "  her  first  and  primitive  model — 
went  by  the  rule  of  government  in  every  city,  including  not  only  the 
city  itself,  but  the  suburbs  or  region  lying  about  it  within  the  verge  of 
its  jurisdiction.'* 

Orig.  Ecdes.  Book  IX.  c,  2.  Vol.  1. 351. 

13 


96 

mnts.  Yet  let  them  not  be  puffed  up :  but  let 
them  yield  more  perfect  service  to  the  glory  of 
God,  that  they  may  obtain  from  him  a  better 
freedom.  Let  them  not  seek  to  acquire  their 
freedom  at  the  public  expense,  lest  they  should 
be  found  to  be  slaves  of  lust."*  Here  Bishop 
Polycarp  is  directed  to  attend,  in  person,  to  the 
church's  widows — to  meet  w^ith  his  people  fre- 
quently— to  inquire  after  them  all  by  7iame ;  even 
down  to  the  very  slaves — to  see  that  this  notice 
from  their  Bishop  be  not  abused  by  tliem,  so  as 
to  grow  unruly,  and  to  express  impatience  under 
their  condition,  and  an  improper  expectation  of 
being  ransomed  and  set  at  liberty  by  the  church's 
charity. 

These  were  theii  the  functions  of  a  Bishop, 
Ignatius  being  judge.  What  must  have  been 
the  size  of  Poly  carp's  diocese  to  admit  of  his 
performing  them  ?  How  could  they  be  perform- 
ed in  the  fourth  century  by  a  Bishop  of  Hippo 
through  a  diocese  forty  miles  long  in  a  populous 
country  ?     Or  by  a  Bishop  of  Rome  towards  a 

ttViuTus  -yvaofAHg  (Tov  yiVic-Qo)' — 5ry}ivcT6gov  crvvctyoeyAiyivia-boctrAV.  j|ONO- 
MAT02    nANTA2  ^uni.  J'ovhovg  ^  S'ovKAi  y-a  itTrtginpn-vu'  olKKsl  fAnSi 

vo?  «X€y6«g/*c  Tvy(^a>criv  atto  Qiov.  /ua  atj^iTwrctv  clttq  tow  koivou  iXiuB^oua-- 
6*/,  tva.  fJiii  iuVKot  iv^iQaiiTiv  iViBvfAictg. 

Igkat,  Ep.  ad  Polycarp.  apud  PP.  App.    Tom.  II. p.  91,  92 

ed.  Clerici.  Fol.  1TS4 


97 

cure  of  more  than  a  niillion  of  souls  in  the  citj 
alone  ?*  One  would  think  that  the  epi'^copal 
powers  and  occupations  of  Augustine  or  Libe- 
Rius  could  hardly  have  been  quite  the  same  with 

those  of  POLYCARP. 

It  appears  then,  that  the  form  of  church  go- 
vernment gradually  altered,  so  as  to  become,  in 
process  of  time,  very  diiierent  from  the  aposto- 
lic estabhshment :  and  even  if  this  be  denied,  it 
is  beyond  all  doubt  that  different  opinions  prevail- 
ed in  the  primitive  church  concerning  her  origi- 
nal order.  For,  not  to  mention  that  Jerome  could 
hardly  be  alone  in  his  views ;  could  hardly  have 
appealed  to  the  knowledge  which  the  Presbyters 
of  his  day  had  of  their  own  rights,  though  nearly 
dormant — the  very  same  sentiments  were  main- 
tained wdth  great  acceptance  among  good  peo- 
ple, by  Aerius,  a  monk  and  Presbyter  of  Arme- 
nia, in  the  fourth  century  ;  and  produced  uneasi- 
ness throughout  the  extensive  districts  of  Arme- 
nia, Pontus,  and  Cappadocia.f 

Yet  all  this  variety  of  opinion  and  practice  in 
the  matter  of  church-order,  did  not  produce,  and 
therefore  w^as  not  thought  sufficient  to  warrant, 

*  Gibbon's  Decl.  and  Fall.     yd.  V.p.  289.  8vo.l811. 

t  MosHEiM,  yol.  I.  p.  376.  MoRBRi,  Grand  Dicllonnaire  Histo- 
rique,  art.  Aerius,  T.  I.  p.  168.  Aerius  has  been  charged  with  the 
Arian  heresy.  A  charge  which  seems  to  be  at  least  doubtful.  Bi?i 
whether  ill  or  well  founded,  it  ''an  have  no  influence  upon  the  case 
before  n«;. 


98 

separate  communions.     For  neither  did  Jerome, 
Aerius,  and  their  adherents,  who  openly  attack- 
ed  the   episcopacy  of  their  day  as  destitute  of 
scriptural  or  apostolic  sanction,   withdraw,    on 
that  account,  from  the  fellowship  of  the  Catho- 
lic church,  and  set  up,  like  the  Novatians  and 
Donatists,  a  church  of  their  own ;  nor  w  as  there, 
so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ascertain,  any  such 
measure  taken,  nor  any  rent  among  Christians  oc- 
casioned, in  virtue  of  disagreements  under  that 
head.    However  animated  their  discussions,  and 
strong  the  conflict  of  their  feelings,  neither  did 
the  opposers  of  the  then  existing  order  break  off 
communion  with  its  advocates  ;  nor  its  advocates, 
who  were  the  practical  majority,  expel  their  op- 
posers.   In  different  places  they  maintained  their 
different  order,  and  in  the  same  place  their  dif- 
ferent sentiments,  without  bursting  the  bands  of 
their  common  union.    On  the  contrary,  it  is  wor- 
thy of  special  remark,  that  Jerome  himself,  who, 
of  all  others,  most  boldly  bearded  his  cotempo- 
rary  prelates,  and  proved  their  official  superiority 
lobe  against  the  word  of  God,  yet  shuddered  at  the 
thought  of  separation,  and  condemned  separatists 
in  terms  of  unqualified  reprobation.  On  Prov.  vi. 
16 — 19.  especially  on  those  words.  He  that  soio- 
eth  discord  among  brethren,  he  thus  comments :  The 
mse  man, "  ermmerates  six  capital  crimes ;  which, 
however,  in  comparison  ^vith  '  the  soi^/er  of  dis^ 


99 

cord,'  he  puts  by  as  of  minor  impoilance :  be- 
cause the  rupture  of  that  unity  and  brotherhood 
which  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  formed, 
is  the  most  atrocious  deed  of  the  whole.  For  a 
man  may  lift  up  his  eyes  in  pride  ;  may  be  guilty 
of  lying  ;  may  be  polluted  with  murder  ;  may 
plot  mischief  against  his  neighbour;  may  em- 
ploy his  members  in  other  enormities — a  profli- 
gate man,  I  say,  may  bring  these  mischiefs  upon 
himself  or  others,  and  yet  the  peace  of  the  church 
be  preserved.  But  Donatus,  and  Arius,  and 
their  followers,  liave  done  what  is  worse ;  for  they 
have  cut  asunder  the  harmony  of  brotherly  union 
by  sowing  discord J^'^^ 

The  result  is,  that  different  views  and  practices 
in  the  article  of  her  government,  were  not  deem- 
ed by  the  primitive  church  to  be  inconsistent  with 
her  unity — with  her  one  communion  ;  nor  a  jus- 
tifiable cause  of  intemipting  it. 
.  4th.  The  same  thing  is  to  be  said  of  differen- 
ces in  subordinate  points  of  doctrine. 

*  Enumerat  sex  capitalia  crimina,  quae  tanien,  comparatione  discor- 
diam  scminantis^  quasi  minora  deponit :  quia  nvinirum  majus  est  /acinus 
illud  quoimitas  ef  fraternitas  quce  per  Spiritus  Sancli  graiiam  est  comiexa^ 
dissipatur.  Potest  enim  qullibet  oculos  jactanter  extollere  ;  lingua  nien- 
tii'i ;  houiicidio  pollui;  mala  proximo  machinari ;  aliis  sceleribus  mem- 
bra subclere — Potest,  inquam,  perditus  quisque  hujusraodi  mala  vel  sibi- 
metipsi  vel  aliis inferre,  pace  servata  Ecclesia.  At  Honatus  et  Arius, 
eteorura  sequaces,  grarxus  est  quodfecere:  qui  concordiamfratern(E  unl- 
falis^  discnrdias  seminando^  sciderunt. 

HiERO^.  opp.T.  VIIL  p.  81.  Fol.  Paris,  16^3. 


100 

By   "  subordinate   doctrines"  are  meant    all 
those  which  may  be  either  believed  or  doubted, 
without   sacrificing  any  vital  principle   of   the  , 
Christian  Religion. 

To  draw  the  line  of  distinction  between  the 
essentials  and  non-essentials  of  our  most  Holy 
Faith,  is  at  all  times  a  delicate  and  difficult  task. 
To  draw  it  with  perfect  accuracy  is  what  no  pru- 
dent man  will  attempt.  But  that  the  distinction 
exists,  that  it  cannot  be  abolished,  and  that  it  is 
attended  with  important  consequences,  no  man 
of  sober  sense  will  deny.  All  the  members  of 
the  human  body  belong  to  its  perfection,  and 
have  their  peculiar  uses.  Yet  a  finger  or  a  toe 
does  not  hold  the  same  place  in  the  system  with 
an  arm  or  a  leg ;  nor  an  arm  or  leg  the  same 
place  with  the  head  or  the  heart.  The  amputa- 
tion of  a  finger  maij  occasion  death  :  the  ampu- 
tation of  a  larger  member  often  does  it.  At  the 
same  time  this  operation  does  not  necessarily 
involve,  the  death  of  the  patient ;  and  when  limit- 
ed to  the  extremities,  frequently  subjects  him  to 
inconveniences  comparatively  small.  No  one 
thinks  of  disputing  his  humanity  on  account  of 
such  a  privation.  He  may  lose  a  limb,  and  yet 
be  active,  useful,  honoured,  happy  ;  much  more 
so  than  many  who  escape  his  misfortune  :  be- 
cause he  may  have  more  life  in  his  remaining 


101 

.iTiembers  than  they  have  in  their  whole  number. 
But  his  head,  his  heart,  the  substance  of  his  bo- 
dy, are  essential  Lop  off  his  arm,  and  his  recove- 
ry may  be  dubious — death  maij  ensue.  But  cut 
off  his  head,  cleave  his  heart,  divide  his  body, 
and  the  blow  is  fatal — there  is  an  end  of  the 
/nan. 

Thus  also  in  the  system  of  revelation.  All,  the 
very  least,  of  its  truths  belong  to  its  perfection. 
Not  one  of  them  may  voluntarily  be  renounced ; 
nor  any  contrary  errour  be  knowingly  embraced. 
Because,  he  who  does  either,  resists  the  obliga- 
tion to  "  receive  and  obey  the  truth."  Just  as 
he  who  "  keeps  the  whole  law,  and  yet  offends 
in  one  point,  is  guilty  of  all."*  The  entire  au- 
thority of  the  lawgiver  is  in  every  precept.  Sin, 
therefore,  which  is  "  transgression  of  the  law," 
whatever  precept  it  may  happen  to  infringe, 
strikes  at  the  principle  of  obedience  ;  and  is 
ready,  as  occasion  shall  offer,  to  assume  any  and 
every  form  of  transgression — to  violate  all  the 
precepts  of  the  law  in  succession,  when  im- 
pelled by  adequate  inducement.  For  he — to  con- 
tinue the  Apostle's  reasoning — he  who  "kills," 
though  he  may  "  not  commit  adultery,"  abstains 


*  James^,  i.  10 


102 

from  the  latter  crime  through  the  intkience  ot.. 
other  considerations  than  the  sacredness  of  the 
law,  or  the  majesty  of  the  lawgiver;  otherwise 
he  would  have  refrained  from  "  kiUing  ;"  seeing  * 
that  "  he  who  said,  Do  not  commit  adultery^  said 
also,  Do  not  kilV^  Consequently,  he  who  breaks 
one    commandment   while   he    keeps    another, 
when  both  are  enjoined  by  the  same  authority, 
shows  that  he  is  prepared,  on  the  occurrence  of 
a  suitable  temptation,  to  break  the  other  also. 
And  whoever  disbelieves  this  of  himself,  "  de- 
ceiveth  his  own  heart;"  for  sin  is  universal  oppo- 
sition to  all  of  God  in  all  of  his  law  :  and,  there- 
fore, according  to  the  inspired  ethics,  the  trans- 
gression of  one  precept  is  accounted  simply  "  a 
transgression  of  the  law  ;"  being  an  act  of  rebel- 
lion against  its  whole  obligation  as  operating  in 
that  precept.     It  is  upon  this  ground,  that  living 
in  the  commission  of  any  knotvri  sin,  however 
small  it  may  appear,  proves   men  to  be  desti- 
tute of  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.    Be- 
cause they  are  under  the  power  of  the  principle 
of  sin,  which  is  "  enmity  against  God  ;"  and  have 
not  been  "  reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of  his 
Son."  So  that  to  venture  upon  sin,  knowing  it  to 
be  sin,  is  a  desperate  experiment  in  any  one  who 
does  not  intend  to  "  lose  his  soul." 

Tn  like  manner,  resistance  to  God's  truth,  to  any 


103 

of  his  truths  when  perceived  to  be  truth,  argtieB 
the  predominance  of  the  spirit  of  falsehood- — a 
spirit  which,  as  opportunity  should  serve,  would 
not  hesitate  to  reUnquish  every  truth  of  his  most 
holy  word.     Hence  no  Christian  can  surrender 
the  least  tittle  of  that  truth  which  he  believes  to 
be  the  testimony  of  his   God ;  nor  do  any  act 
which  implies  such  a  suiTender.     Thousands  of 
the  "  martyrs  of  Jesus,"  might  have  saved  them- 
Gelves  from  the  wild  beast  or  the  stake,  would 
they  only  have  thrown  a  handful  of  incense  on  a 
Heathen  altar.  But  they  were  aware  of  the  con- 
struction which  their  persecutors  would  put  upon 
this   deed  5  and,  rather  than  do  it,  "  loved  not 
their  lives  unto  the  death."     No  motives,  then,  of 
conscience,  peace,  charity,  good  to  be  effected, 
or  of  what  kind  soever,  can  justify,  much  less  re- 
<][uire,  under  any  possible  circumstances,  the  sa- 
crifice of  a  known  truth-    Such  a  sacrifice  might 
end  in  eternal  i*uin.  On  the  other  hand,  mistakes 
concerning  particular  truths,  may  consist  with 
the  general  power  of  truth  over  the  heart.     Nay, 
it  is  nothing  uncommon  for  men's  notions  to  be 
at  war  with  their  principles — Their  speculative 
judgment   with  their  practical   habits.      Many 
times  a  sound  head  is  joined  to  a  rotten  heart : 
and  a  sound  heart  to  a  rotten  head.     Some  pe- 
rish because  they  do  not  follow  out  their  profess- 

14 


104 

ed  faith  :  and  others  would  perish  if  they  did. 
The  not  perceiving,  and  therefore  not  embracing, 
the  consequences  of  their  errour  preserves  them 
"  from  going  down  to  the  pit."  And  as  there  is 
not  a  human  being  perfectly  exempt  from  errour, 
there  is  not  one  of  all  them  who  "  shall  see  the 
Lord," but  owes  more  or  less  to  the  same  protec- 
tion. How  far  erroneous  conceptions  of  divine 
truth  may  be  compatible  with  a  state  of  pardon 
and  heavenly  adoption,  it  would  be  presumptu- 
ous in  us  to  define.  That  is  the  prerogative  of 
him  who,  searching  the  heart,  can  weigh  all  its 
influences,  interests,  and  dilficulties.  But  to  try 
how  far  we  may  go  before  we  discern  our  salva- 
tion to  be  in  jeopardy,  is  the  insanity  of  one  who 
should  have  his  limbs  amputated  higher  and 
higher  in  order  to  try  how  near  the  operation 
might  approach  his  vitals  without  destroying  his 
life.  In  judging  for  himself^  every  one  must 
make  sure  work  by  keeping  on  the  safe  side,  not 
wilfully  rejecting  any  tiTith,  or  adopting  any  er- 
rour. In  judging  of  others,  he  must  go  every 
length  which  the  charity  of  the  gospel  dictates ; 
i.  e.  every  length  consistent  with  his  own  attach- 
ment to,  and  support  of,  the  truth  ;  and  which  does 
not  rank,  among  matters  of  forbearance,  a  clearly 
vital  doctrine  of  Christianity.  This  would  be  not 
charity,  but  treason  and  murder — Treason  to  the 


105 

"  AMEN,  the  faithful  and  true  witness" — murder  to 
the  soul  of  our  dekided  neighbour.  For  as  there 
are  injuries  which  infallibly  kill  the  body,  so  there 
are  errours  which  infalHbly  kill  the  soul.  If  a 
man  be  run  through  the  heart,  whether  by  acci- 
dent or  design,  whether  by  his  own  or  another's 
hand,  he  dies.  And  if  a  man,  from  whatever 
cause,  renounce  the  obviously  vital  doctrines  of 
the  gospel — he  is  not,  cannot  be,  a  Christian — 
there  is  no  relief  for  him  5  no  help  ;  no  hope — 
he  DIES  THE  DEATH.  Thosc  doctriucs,  therefore, 
must  be  the  basis  of  all  Christum  communion ; 
and  maintaining  those  doctrines  pure  and  entire, 
"  holding  the  head,"  Christ  Jesus,  as  saith  his 
apostle,  his  followers  may  and  should  have  open 
fellowship  with  each  other,  on  the  ground  of  their 
common  faith  ;  and  ought  not  to  refuse  each 
other  on  the  ground  of  their  inferiour  differ- 
ences. 

Should  it  be  asked,  how  shall  I  distinguish  an 
essential  from  a  subordinate  doctrine  of  the  gos- 
pel? The  answer  has  be^n  chiefly  anticipated. 
You  are  not  under  the  necessity  of  nice  and  sub- 
tle discriminations  ;  and  can  certainly  distinguish 
wdth  sufficient  accuracy  for  every  practical  pm*- 
pose.  You  are  in  no  danger  of  mistaking  a  man's 
arm  for  his  finger-his  head  for  his  foot ;  nor  of  sup- 
posing that  they  are  equally  important  to  his  life. 


106 

i'ou  cannot  imagine,  for  one  moment,  that  tlie 
question,  "  whether  Christ  bj  his  death  purchased 
temporal  benefits  or  not  for  all  mankind?"  is  like 
the  question  "  whether  or  not  he  bought  his  peo- 
ple unto  God  by  his  blood,  in  making  a  true,  pro- 
per, meritorious  sacrifice  for  their  sin,  when 
'through  the  eternal  Spirit  he  offered  up  him- 
self ?'"  Nor  that  the  dispute,  "  whether  the  cove- 
nant of  Redemption  be  different  from  the  cove- 
nant of  Grace  ?"  or  what  are  so  called,  be  in  re- 
ality but  one  and  the  same  covenant  view^ed  un- 
der different  aspecte  ?  is  to  be  classed  with  the 
dispute  ''  whether  Jesus,  t^c  Lord  our  righteous- 
ness^ is  a  mere  man  like  ourselves,  or  the  '  true 
God,'  and,  therefore,  ^  eternal  life  ?'  " — In  de- 
ciding on  the  relative  importance  of  such  points 
there  is  no  room  for  hesitation.  Whatever  de- 
gree of  mistake  may  be  reconciled  with  union 
to  Christ,  and  an  interest  in  his  salvation,  it  is 
not,  it  cannot  be  a  matter  of  doubt  among  those 
who  have  tasted  his  grace,  that  blaspheming  hi& 
divinity-rejecting  his  propitiatory  sacrifice  ;  and 
the  justification  of  a  sinner  by  faith  only^  in  his 
mediatorial  merits — denying  the  personality,  di- 
vinity, renewing  and  sanctifying  virtue  of  his  ho- 
ly Spirit,  and  similar  heresies  ;  invalidate  everf 
claim  to  the  character  of  his  disciples.  They 
who  disown  or  explain  away  such  truths  as  these^ 


107 

pretend  what  they  may,  are  no  more  servants  of 
Christ,  nor  partakers  of  his  benefits,  than  Jews, 
Mahometans,"^  or  Pagans. 


*  There  is  a  very  curious,  though  almost  forgotten  paper,  in  which 
the  Unitarians,  as  they  call  themselves,  in  opposition  to  those  who 
hold  the  doctrine  of  the  ever-blessed  Trinity,  expressly  claim  kind- 
ted  w.th  the  Mahometans.  It  is  an  address  fr»ni  two  English  Socini- 
ans  or  Arians,  (it  matters  little  which)  "  in  their  own  names,  and  in 
that  of  a  multitude  of  their  persuasion,"  whom  they  style  "  a  wise 
and  religious  sort  of  people,"  to  the  Morocco  embassador  at  the  court  of 
Charles  the  II.  and  is  entitled,  "  An  Epistle  Dedicatory,  to  his  illus- 
trious Excellency,  Ameth  Ben  Ameth,  embassador  of  the  mighty 
Emperor  of  Fez  a?id  Morocco,  to  Charles  II.  JfiCmg  of  Great  Bri' 
tainP 

In  this  "  epistle  dedicatory,"  they  tell  his  Mahometan  Excellency 
that  the  faith  of  his  countrymen  and  sect  is  much  purer  in  the  article 
"  touching  the  belief  of  an  only  sovereign  God,"  and  "  many  other 
wholesome  doctrines,"  than  the  faith  Oi"  either  Papal  or  Protestant 
Christendom :  seeing  that  about  these  doctrines  in  which  they,  the 
Mahometans,  "  persevere,"  "  this,  our  western  part  of  the  world,''  the 
Eritish  isJes  and  European  continent,  "  are  declined  into  several  er- 
rours  from  the  integrity  of  their  predecessors."  And  they  "  heartily 
salute  and  congratulate  his  Excellency  and  all  who  were  with  him,  a« 
votaries  and  viEi.i.ow-worshippers  of  that  sole  Supreme  Deity  of  the  Al- 
mighty Father  and  Creator."  Observe,  they  are  no^  "  fellow- worship- 
pers" with  Christians  tn  this  matter  (God  be  praised  !)  but  with  Ma-* 
hometans — And  they  "  greatly  rejoice  and  thank  his  Divine  bounty 
that  hath  preserved  the  Emperour  of  Morocco  and  his  people,"  being 
Mahometans,  "  in  the  excellent  knowledge  of  that  truth,"  already 
mentioned,  which  the  Christian  world,  it  seems,  had  lost;  and  they 
assure  his  Excellency,  which  is  a  certain  verity,  that  "  in  those  impor- 
tant points,"  viz.  the  Unitarian  doctrines  concerning  God,  they 
"  draw  nigher  to  the  Mahometans,  than  all  other  Pi'otestant  or  Papaf 
Christians" — And  they  furthermore  state  to  his  Excellency,  that  they 
are,  their,  thp  Mahometans',  '•^ne^tresi  fellow-champions  for  those 


108 

In  the  language  of  one  whose  scriptural  artille- 
ry has  often  battered  and  shaken  the  "  gates  of 
hell,"  "they  neither  know  him,  nor  love  him,  nor 


ti-uths:"  and,  moreover,  "  thatGorf  had  raised  up  their  Mahomet  to  defend 
the  same  truth ;''^  viz.  ''the  faith  of  one  Supreme  God  ici^h  the  sword,  as 
a  scourge  on  those  idolising  Christians,"  even  as  "  they,  with  their  Cni- 
larian  brethren,"  had  been  accustomed  to  •'  defend  it  with  their  pens." 
JBehold  a  "  defender  of  the  faith,"  far  goodlier  than  Henry  the  VIII; 
and  much  dearer  to  the  Unitarians  than  any  of  his  successors,  not  ex- 
cepting Edward  the  VI,  or  H'?7/?a7/i  of  Orange!  Behold  an  fl?icien/ 
and  avowed  alliance  ;  "  The  sword  q/"  Mahomet  and  the  Unitari- 
AN  pen .'"  All  this  and  more,  in  a  style  of  fawning  compliment,  from  a 
sect  of  professed  Christians  to  an  embassador  of  the  great  impos- 
ture :  who  probably  honoured  their  two  representatives,  tlie  instant 
their  backs  were  turned,  with  the  ordinary  lovii^g  appellation  of 
"'  Christian  dogs^ 

The  whole  of  this  precious  "epistle,"  is  prefixed  to  Leslie's  "^o- 
cinian controversy  discussed."     Theol.  Works,  Tol.  I.  207.  211. 

Such  an  acknowledged  coincidence  between  Unitarianism  and  310- 
hometanism,  goes  far  to  justify  the  assertion,  that  there  is  no  very  wide 
ditterenge  between  Unitarians  and  Deists.  But  we  are  not  left  to  con- 
struction or  inference  on  this  head.  The  affinity  is  distinctly  avowed 
by  no  less  a  personage  than  the  Colossal  English  Socinian — the  late. 
Dr.  Joseph  Priestley.  In  a  letter  to  his  trend,  Mr.  Belsham, 
dated  "  Northumberland,  April  23,  1815,"  speakmg  of  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son, former  President  of  the  United  States,  the  Doctor  observes,  that 
"  he,",  (Mr.  Jefferson,)  "  is  generally  considered  as  an  unbeliever,"  i.  e. 
an  ivJideL  "  If  so,  however,  he  cannot  be  far  from  us."  Here  is  a  fair 
and  full  confession,  that  infidelity  and  Socinianism  are  near  neighbours  ; 
or  else,  a  person  allowed  to  be  an  infidel,  would  be  ''  far  off"  from  a  So- 
cinian, which  Dr.  Priestley  says  is  not  the  fact.  We  say  so  too; 
and  that  they  had  much  better  shake  hands  at  once,  than  keep  up  ^n 
unmeaning  warfare:  especially,  as  Wm.  Wells,  Esq.  of  Boston,  agen- 
ileman  of  talent  and  a  scholar,  "  whose  zeal,"  to  quote  Mr.  Eels- 
ham,  "whose  zealfor  truth,"  i.  e.  Socinianism,  "  is  beyond  all  praise," 
has  told  us,  in  a  letter  to  Mr.  B.  3Iarch  SI,  1812,  "  that  Unitarianieai 


109 

believe  in  him,  nor  do  any  wise  belong  imto 
him."*  With  such  men  there  can  be  neither 
communion  nor  compromise.  They  are  to  be  re- 
garded as  enemies  of  both  the  cross  and  the 
crown  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ — as  that  spiritual 
Amalek  with  whom  he  and  his  are  sworn  to  have 
war,  only  war,  and  war  continually,  "  from  gene- 
ration to  generation."  Not  that  any  Avhom  his 
love  "  constrains,"  arc  to  cherish  hostile  or  un- 
courteous,  or  untender  feeling  toward  their  per- 
sons ;  or  to  think  themselves  released,  in  their 
case,  from  the  obligations  of  social  kindness. 
God  forbid  !  Neither  fidelity  to  the  truth,  nor  in- 
tense affection  to  the  children  of  truth,  involves 
such  a  consequence. 

"  He,"  to  repeat  the  words  of  Dr.  Owen,  "  he 
who  professeth  love  unto  the  saints,  that  pecu- 
liar love  which  is  required  toward  them ;  and  doth 
not  exercise  love  in  general  towards  all  men  : 
much  more  if  he  make  the  pretence  of  brotherly 
love  the  ground  of  alienating  his  affection  from 


consists  rather  in  not  believing  !  !"(a)  Now  if  faith  is  so  essential  to  the 
character  of  true  Christians,  that  the  word  of  their  God  denominates 
thein  from  that  very  thing,  believers  ;  then,  the  Unitarians,  themselves 
being  judges,  are  far  enough  from  being  Christians! 
*  Dr.  Jonu  Owen. 

{a)  See  foe  these  facts, and  certain  other  curious  matter,  a  pamjihlet,  just  re-published  in 
Boston,  entitled  American  Unitarianism,  or,  "  The  progress  and  present  stitr:  of  the  Uni.^ 
■urian  L-hurche^  in  Amerwa^''  &c.  tij  the  Rcv.  Thomas  B-^rsham,  rsicx-stred,  Lomron- 


110 

tile  rest  of  mankiod,  can  have  no  assurance  that 
the  love  he  so  professeth  is  sincere,  incorrupt, 
genuine,  and  vs^ithout  dissimulation."*  Even 
the  most  determined  enemies  of  the  truth  are 
not  to  be  debarred  from  this  Christian  philan- 
thropy. While  we  hate,  oppose,  and  Avould  ut- 
terly destroy  their  "  abominations,"  we  would  do 
good  to  themselves,  as  we  have  opportunity,  both 
for  this  life,  and  for  that  which  is  to  come.  Our 
"  hearts  desire  and  prayer  for  them  is,"  and  ought 
to  be,  "  that  they  may  be  saved" — -that  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  the  "  Prince  and  Saviour"  whom,  not 
Imowing,  they  "  persecute,"  would  appear  unto 
them  in  the  visions  of  his  word— would  ^^  open 
their  blind  eyes  that  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of 
the  glory  of  God  in  his  person  and  work  "may 
shine  into  their  hearts ;"  so  that  obtaining  mercy, 
like  the  illustrious  convert  of  Tarsus,  because  they 
act  "  ignorantly  and  in  unbelief;''  they  may,  like 
him,  learn  to  extol  the  "  exceeding  abundant  grace 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  ;"  and,  like  him  too,  "  preach," 
or  promote  "  the  faith"  which  they  are  labouring 
to  "  destroy."  x\nd  the  church  shall  "  glorify 
God  in  them."     Amen  ! 

But  while  they  "  remain  in  their  unbelief"™ 
denying  in  fact,  though  acknowledging  in  words, 

»  Gave??  on  Heb.  VI.  9.    Expos.  m\>\.  III.  89.  Fol. 


Ill 

that  "Just  and  Holy  One,"  there  is  an  hnmea- 
sarable  gulf  between  them  and  real  Christians. 
Thej  have  no  part  in  our  heavenly  "  David,"  nor 
any  inheritance  in  our  "  son  of  Jesse."  Howevef 
painful  the  necessity,  it  is  still  necessity  which 
compels  us  to  exclaim,  "  O  my  soul,  come  not 
thou  into  their  secret !  unto  their  assembly,  mine 
honoiu',  be  not  thou  united  !" 

Such  was  the  judgment  and  practice  of  the 
primitive  church.  The  basis  of  her  communion 
was  laid,  as  we  have  already  seen,  in  the  substan- 
tial doctrines  of  the  gospel,  as  summed  up  in  her 
creed.  This  she  required  to  be  adopted  and  pro- 
fessed by  all  who  offered  themselves  to  her  fel- 
lowship.  It  contained,  then,  her  terms  of  com- 
munion. Consequently,  agreement  in  opinions 
about  which  Christians  might  differ  without  im- 
pugning any  of  these  doctrines,  made  no  part  of 
those  terms.  In  other  words,  she  did  not  con- 
sider such  differences  as  violating  her  unity.  And 
how  numerous  they  were,  no  one  needs  be  told 
who  has  looked  into  her  history. 

Having  seen  what  the  primitive  church  did 
not  view  as  inconsistent  with  her  visible  unity^ 
let  us  now  inquire, 

By  what,  in  her  judgment,  it  was  liable  to  be 
broken.  This  effect  might  be  produced  three 
ways— 

15 


112 

By  schisms  within  her  bosom  ; 

By  the  renunciation  oi fundamental  truth  ;  and 

By  ivithdraiviug  from  her  communion. 

1st.  Schisms  within  her  bosom,  in  the  rupture 
of  brotherly  harmony^  she  always  accounted  scan- 
dalous violations  of  her  unity,  even  though  the 
bonds  of  external  fellowship  were  not  thereby 
dissolved.  Let  the  expostulation  of  Clemens 
Rom  AN  us  with  the  church  of  Corinth,  be  both  ex- 
ample and  proof.  The  professing  Christians  in 
that  city  had  given  early  indications  of  such  a 
disorderly  temper,  as  to  call  for  the  authoritative 
interposition  of  the  apostle  Paul,  When  the  tire 
of  contention  has  once  seized  upon  a  communi- 
ty, and  been  fostered  by  personal  antipathies^  its 
extinction  is  one  of  the  most  rare  and  difficult  of 
human  things.  It  may  subside  for  a  while,  and 
even  appear  to  go  out ;  yet  if  any  new  brand  of 
controversy  be  thrown  among  the  public  passions, 
the  smothered  flame  will  be  rekindled,  will  seek 
its  wonted  cliannels,  and  burst  forth  and  rage 
with  increased  violence.  The  same  individuals, 
or  their  descendants,  will  be  regularly  arrayed 
against  each  other.  Let  there  be  only  a  dispute, 
and  a  person  of  sense  acquainted  with  previous 
facts,  shall  be  able,  almost  infallibly,  to  foretell 
how  the  parties  will  be  arranged.  If  two  or 
three  conspicuous  individuals  who  formerly  act- 
ed together,  should  declare  themselves,  the  die  i?^ 


113 

cast  Their  old  opponents  take  the  oth«r  side  as 
a  matter  of  course.  Thus  social  conflicts  become 
hereditary  ;  and  revive  under  varied  shapes,  long 
after  the  original  disagreement  is  buried  and  for- 
gotten. Should  thev,  however,  be  diverted  from 
this  their  natural  direction,  and  even  be  happily 
terminated,  they  leave  in  the  social  body  a  pre- 
disposition to  the  same  evil  disease.  This  was 
probably  the  state  of  the  church  of  Corinth.  It 
had  been  split  up  into  parties  who  attached  them- 
selves to  particular  ministers,  and  were  more  pas- 
sionately devoted,  as  is  usual,  to  the  glory  of 
their  respective  chiefs,  than  to  those  great  inter- 
ests in  which  they  were  equally  concerned.  Paul 
had  quelled  their  foolish  tumults :  but  he  is  no 
sooner  gone  to  his  crown  of  righteousness,  than 
they  embark  in  a  new  strife.  A  number  of  those 
who  had  quarrelled  with  each  other  about  their 
favourite  teachers,  now  turn  round,  and  make 
common  cause  against  the  teachers  themselves. 
Such  is  the  consistency  of  human  passions!  Such 
the  stability  of  popular  affection ! 

We  learn  the  fact  from  Clemens  Romanus,  a 
contemporary  of  the  Apostles,*  and  perhaps  the 
next  to  the  Apostles  in  worth  and  dignity.  We 
also  learn  from  him,  the  light  in  which  the  litigi- 

•  EusEB.  E.  H  Lib.  V.C.6.  p.217. 


114 

ous  spirit  of  the  Corinthians  was  viewed  by  their 
fellow  christians.  In  his  first,  which  is  his  ge- 
nuine, epistle  to  their  church,  he  thus  patheti- 
cally remonstrates  with  them  on  the  subject  of 
their  feuds: 

"  Let  us  cleave  to  the  innocent  and  the  just : 
for  these  are  the  elect  of  God.  Why  are  there 
strifes,  and  angry  tempers,  and  dissentions, 
and  schisms,  and  fightings,  among  you  ?  Have 
we  not  one  God,  and  one  Christ,  and  one  Spirit 
poured  out  upon  us  ;  and  one  calling  in  Christ  ? 
Why  do  we  rend  asunder  the  members  of  Christ, 
and  factiously  strive  against  our  own  body,  and 
proceed  to  such  a  height  of  madness  as  to  forget 
that  we  are  members  one  of  another  ?  Remem- 
ber the  words  of  our  Lord  Jesus:  For  he  said, 
IVo  to  that  man  !  It  had  been  better  for  him  not  to 
have  been  born  than  to  lay  a  stumbling-block  before 
one  of  my  elect :  it  had  been  better  for  him  to  be 
hound  to  a  mill-stone^  and  be  plunged  into  the  sca^ 
than  to  stumble  one  of  my  little  ones. 

"  Your  schism  has  perverted  many  ;  has  thrown 
many  into  despondence  ;  many  into  wavering : 
all  of  us  into  sorrow — and  your  factions  con- 
tinue !"* 


115 

Again :  "  Let  him  who  has  love  in  Christ,  keep 
the  commandments  of  Christ.  The  bond  of  the 
love  of  God,  who  can  set  forth?  the  magniiicence 
of  his  beauty  who  is  sufficient  to  express  as  he 
ought  ?  The  height  to  which  love  conducts  is 
beyond  all  utterance.  Love  permits  no  schism ; 
love  cherishes  no  factions ;  love  does  every  thing 
in  harmony ;  by  love  all  the  elect  of  God  are  per- 
fected— without  love,  nothing  is  acceptable  to 
God,"^      . 

The  dissentions  against  which  Clemens,  after 
the  example  of  Paul,  so  divinely  pleads,  were 
within  the  church.  With  all  their  strifes  and  se- 
ditions among  themselves,  there  was  one  bond 


fAiKu  rev  Xpta-lcuy  x,  T-xcrict^ofj.iv  /tr^af  to  o-afA-o.  to  idtov^  i  ui  ToretvThV 
ttvrovoiAV  i^^o(jt.i^a.i  u^t  iTrihuBis-bdii  yiuetg  ort  fAiKh  t^fAtv  x\hn\a>v  ;  Mvno-- 
5nri  ray  Koyav  ln(roii  rev  Kvgiou  -^juffv.  Ettvi  yotg'  Oun.i'lcti  Ayd^vTrft  ix-UVUi' 
KdiKov  ))v  cLvrct  a  cvk  i-yivvuBrt,  n  ivet.lecv  (icKtKlfjcv  (jlov  crK(tvJ'A\i(ru.r  Kgiirrov 
«y  Avlci)  'rsre§i7e6>)V«/  y.ukovy  k^li  x,<trcL7rovria-biiveti  «/f  txv  BeLKa.a-<ra.v,  n  «vrf. 
reev  jUtK^ay  fJt-ov  (Dt.itvS'AKKnti.  To  a-yirrfxa.  C/nuv  Trohhov^  S'nTe^i-\iv-,  twcwovc 
it;  eiBvfMa.v  i^Ahtv,  mroKT^ovc  it?  S^iT^yiuoVy  tco?  -i!ra(.v7atf  «('>«?  "?  hvnrnv'  ^ 
i'r:fjiovo;  CuosV  «5"iV  «  <r']<t(Tig. 

Clem.  Rom.  Ep.  I.  ad.  Cor.  c.  46.  ap. 

P.P.  App.  Tom.  I.  p.  1T4,  5. 
*  'O  t^eov  at)/«ttsrj)V  (V  X^iT(f>  rugna-ttrcd  Tat  rov  Xg/row  ^ct^9.yytA.fji<irei. 
7:v  it<r/uiov  t»s  A^at-or^c  tow  Qiov  rti  ^vvAtett  (^nyna-AO-Bait;  ro  (MyAKUcv 
<rits  x.tiXXoviif  eturoui  tic  a^ku,  tij  scTe/,  utfuv  ,  to  v-^og  it?  o  a.vnyu^  Ayet- 
•^.f,  AviKif^mynrcv  i^tv.  KyxTrn  2XI2M.A  ova  t^if  etyA^n  cv  2TA21A- 
/EI.  AyA'arn  ttavta  ttoih  tv  'OMONOIA/.  Ek  ciyA-ry  iriKiiitS>i(rAV  TfAvlic 
vi  iK^srT'it  rrj  fHitv,'  Sty  a  ayA<crr,c  cvS'iv  cjAgiTov  in  ru>  ©fw. 

Id.Ib.  c. -ifi.p.176. 


116 

which  they  did  not  venture  to  break — the  bond 
of  their  common  Christianity.  This  still  pre- 
served their  public  union  with  each  other,  and 
with  the  church  of  God.  Yet  observe  the  topics 
M^hich  Clemens  urges  for  the  restoration  of  con- 
cord.    They  are  three : 

(1.)  All  schisms;  all  dividing  of  Christian  from 
Christian — all  things  which  prevent  their  free, 
full,  affectionate,  evangelical  intercourse,  are  at 
war  with  their  relations  as  members  of  the  one 
body  of  Clirist. 

(2.)  They  are  incoropati'ole  with  the  reiguing 
))Ower  of  Christian  love. 

(3.)  They  hinder  the  progress  of  the  gospel; 
they  shake  the  faith  of  some ;  produce  apostacy 
in  others ;  grieve  the  hearts  and  weaken  the 
hands  of  unwavering  believers,  and  expose  their 
authours  and  abettors  to  the  severest  comrnina- 
tions  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

If  the  many  and  woful  contentions  now  in  the 
church  of  Christ,  affect  not  her  children  in  the 
same  manner,  their  indifference  arises,  and  can 
arise,  from  no  other  cause  than  their  having  "  left 
their  first  love." 

Let  this  suffice  for  the  first  point. 

2d.  The  primitive  church  considered  the  re- 
nunciation of  fundamental  truth  as  inconsistent 
with  her  unity. 


117 

This  ilowed,  and  must  forever  flow,  as  a  ne- 
cessary consequence  from  the  very  principle  of 
her  being,  viz.  her  faith.  She  is  huilt  upon  the 
foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus 
Christ  himself  heing  the  chief  corner-stone;  in 
whom  all  the  buildings  fitly  framed  together^ grow- 
eth  mito  an  holy  temple  in  the  I^ord.^ 

The  apostles  and  prophets,  i.  e.  their  inspired 
doctrines,  contain  God's  testimony  concerning 
that  eterxial  life  which  he  hath  given  to  us  in  his 
SON  ;t  'which  divine  testimony  is  addressed  to, 
and  embraced  by,  the  faith  of  his  church.t  And 
as  the  sole  foundation  of  faith,  in  every  possible 
form  and  degree,  is  testimony ;  so,  whatever  rests 
upon  testimony,  must  have  faith  as  its  essential 
principle.  Therefore,  the  church  of  God,  found- 
ed upon  pure  revelation,  i.  e.  upon  his  own  testi- 
mony in  his  written  word,  exists  by  faith,  and  by 
faith  alone.  As  this  is  not  the  time  to  "stop  the 
.mouths"  of  those  "  vain  talkers,"  Avho  charge 
the  doctrine  which  so  highly  exalts  tlie  faith  of 
the  church,  with  depressing,  in  the  same  propor- 
tion, her  love  and  practice  of  moral  virtne  ;  they 
shall  be  dismissed  with  a  single  remark — Should 
a  man,  on  the  search  for  "  ti-ue  holiness,"  go  in 


*  Efh.  ii.  20,  21.  t  lJo«N,v.  11, 

+  The  BiBLF,  froiH  begioniflg  t<»  e»«l. 


118 

quest  of  it  among  the  unbelievers^  the  vvoiid  itiself 
would  account  him  vastly  simple ! 

To  return.  Try  the  common  sense  of  man- 
kind on  this  point.  Ask  them  what  they  would 
think  of  an  unbelieving  church  of  God  ?  The 
idea  is  shocking.  Our  understandings  revolt  from 
its  absurdity  ;  our  hearts  from  its  impiety.  No 
ingenuity  has  ever  been  able  to  juslif; ,,  or  even 
to  palliate,  before  the  bar  of  plain  dealing,  sub- 
scription to  creeds  which  the  subscriber  does  not 
sincerely  beheve,  upon  the  pretence  of  their  being 
"  articles  of  peace  ;"  or  of  their  admitting  a  con- 
struction which  is  not  their  obvious,  unlaboured, 
natural  meaning.  This  is  jugglery  all  over.  The 
two-faced  oracle  of  Delphos  in  the  sanctuary  of 
God.     It  belongs  to  those  deep  dissimulations, 

That  palter  with  U3  in  a  double  sense  ; 
That  keep  the  word  of  promise  to  our  ear, 
And  break  it  to  our  hope.* 

The  agreement  thus  apparently  effected  be- 
tween belief  and  unbelief;  between  faith  and 
no  faith— the  oil  and  water  in  Christian  doctrine  ; 
w^s  well  defined  by  one  who  "  smacked"  but 
little  of  orthodoxy,  to  be,  "  not  the  unity  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace  ;  but  the  union  of 
knaves  in  the  bond  of  hypocrisy." 

*■  Shakspeare. 


119 

In  such  arts  the  early  church  was  no  adept 
That  same  Spirit  of  God  who  taught  her  the 
most  extended  charity  towards  those  who,  with 
all  their  differences,  were  one  in  *•'  the  faith  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  taught  her  also  to  contend 
earnestly  for  that  faith ;  and  not  to  receive  into 
her  bosom,  and  nurture  *.ls  her  children,  any  by 
whom  it  should  be  corrupted.  ^^ If  there  come  any 
unto  you^'^  says  John,  "  and  bring  not  this  doctrine^ 
receive  him  not  into  your  house,  'neither  bid  him 
God  speed.  For  he  that  biddeth  him  'God  speedy 
is  partaker  of  his  evil  dee ds^^'  To  that  conspiracy 
against  truth,  which,  under  the  guise  of  charity, 
welcomes  or  endures  all  sorts  of  doctrines,  and 
those  the  most  contradictory,  even  concerning 
the  person  and  work  of  "  God  our  Saviour,"  both 
the  beloved  disciple  and  the  church  of  his  mas- 
ter, w^ere  utter  strangers.  To  deny  any  capital 
article  of  her  faith,  was,  in  her  view,  to  mar  her 
symmetry,  to  destroy  her  unity,  to  tear  up  her 
very  foundations,  flence  her  public  creeds,  wiiich 
she  required  to  be  embraced  by  every  candidate 
for  baptism — hence  her  stress  upon  her  ONE  faith 
throughout  the  whole  world — and  her  abhorrence 
of  heresy  and  heretics.  Hence  the  work  of  Ire- 
>TyEus  against  the  doctrinal  heresies  w^hich  had 


^  ^  John  10,  11. 
1« 


120 

troubled  her  peace  until  his  day.  iRENiEUS  was 
for  some  time  a  contemporary  of  Polycarp,  hav- 
ing seen  him,  as  he  says  himself,  in  the  early 
part  of  his  life.  This  zealous  vindicator  of  the 
one  faith  of  the  church,  tells  us  upon  Poly- 
carp's  authority,  as  the  story  was  related  by  those 
ivho  had  it  from  Polycarp's  own  lips,  that  the 
apostle  John,  having  gone  into  a  bath  at  EphesuSy 
and  observed  Cerinthus,^  sprang  out  immedi- 
ately, exclaiming,  ^^Let  usjly^lest  the  bath  should 
fall — Ceiiinthus,  the  enemy  of  the  truth,  is  there  P^ 
And  Polycarp  himself  having   fallen  in  vvith 


*  Cebinthtts,  of  the  Gnostic  sect,  the  earliest  corrupters  of  Chris- 
tianity after  the  Judaizing  teachers,  was  in  some  respects  the  prototype 
of  the  modern  Unitarians.  Among  other  fundamental  errours,  he  de- 
uied  the  proper  divinity  of  Christ,  whom  he  considered  as  the  most  glo- 
rious of  the  «Eon«,  a  set  of  created  beings — a  notion  fromivhich  the 
Arians  are  not  very  remote.  He  denied  also,  that  Jesus  was  born  of 
a  virgin,  which  he  held  to  be  impossible ;  and  maintained,  that  he  was 
the  son  of  Joseph  and  Mury,  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature — a  lead- 
ing doctrine  of  the  Socinians  of  the  present  day ;  and  openly  avow- 
td,  in  a  note  to  Mat.  i.  18,  in  what  is  called  an  improved  version  of  iht 
New  Testament,  printed  at  London  in  1808,  and  reprinted  at  Boston 
in  1809.  Cerinthus,  however,  taught,  that  this  Christ,  this  unintelli- 
gible a,on,  descended  on  the  man  .Tesus  at  his  baptism,  and  flew  away 
from  him  at  his  crucifixion. (a)  TVe  do  not  know  that  any  of  his  disci- 
jiles,  who  dream  after  him  in  other  respects,  have  dreamed  this  dream 
also.  iQut  it  was  needless  to  stop ;  while  they  were  about  it,  they  migh-t 
as  well  have  dreamed  the  whole. 

I 
(o) /rcn.  adver.h»re«es, Lib,  I.e. 25. 


121 

Marcion,*  who  begged  to  be  recognised  by  hioj 
as  a  brother,  "  /  recognise  thee^^^  cried  Polycarp, 
^^  as  the  first  horn  of  Satan  /"  "  So  rehgiouslj,'' 
adds  IreiN^eus,  "  did  the  Apostles  and  their  disci- 
ples shun  all  intercourse,  even  in  conversationj 
with  any  of  those  who  adulterated  the  truth."t 
These  traits  of  primitive  character  bear  as  little 
resemblance  to  the  "  charity"  of  the  present  age, 
as  that  charity  bears  to  real  love  to  men  or  loy- 
alty to  God.     Cyprian  is  very  explicit.     "  The 


*  Marcion  of  Pontus,  uttered  horrible  blasphemies,  maintaining, 
among  other  things,  that  "  the  God  of  Abraham  and  the  prophets  is 
not  the  father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  but  a  different  being,  the  aw- 
thourof  evUj  a  delighter  in  wars,  mutable  and  self-contradictory.'* 

Iren.  adv.  1  haer.  Lib.  I.  c.  19, 20. 
The  expression  addressed  by  this  heretic  to  Poly  carp,  viz.  Etsri^/vaxrjce 
iiuatc,  i.e.  "Recognise  us,"  was  somewhat  technical  in  the  primitive 
church;  and  equivalent  with  a. brotherly  salulation.  The  deacons  were 
accustomed  to  use  it  at  the  celebration  of  the  supper,  frequently  call* 
iag  out  to  the  communicants  as  they  came  up,  E^iyivainciTt  «txx;»\6Uf , 
"  Recognise  each  other  .'"  viz.  lest  a  Jew  or  profane  person  might  ap- 
■  proach  the  holy  table.  A  custom  which  throws  light  upon,  and  may 
Lave  been  borrowed  from,  Paul's  expression.  1  Cor.  xvi.  18.  Extriyi-. 
toio-KtTi  Towf  ToioyTow?,  "  Jcknowltdge  them  that  are  si*ch." — 

H.  Valesii,  Annot.  ad.  Euseb.  H.  E.  T.  L  161. 
t  E;<r<y  ol  ftKincooTi;  avtou  (Polycarp)  on  lactvvus  o  rov  Kuj/oy  ^*9»7«ff 
t»  T«  Etpio-a  ^o^ivBitt  xovarAfQ^h  ^  t'^uv  t<rm  K»g/»3"ov,  t^nXetro  TouBaiXat- 
fiiov  /UH  xoycrst/ycsvof,  tthk'  i'sru'ret,*y  '^^vyafAiV,  y-n  x^ro  B*Xatv4/ov  <rufx7ri<r\f, 

«5rg*5<3-»,   *'  ETnyivma-xm  toy  /wgaTOTOwov   Toy   lnlitvuP      ToTeturitv  oe 
A'src^TOkot  K,  oi  fAA^-nrxt  dtvreev  iar^jiv  tvKit0ti!iVj  srgof  to  /x»  i'tfJ-^XV  '^^V"" 

iREK.ap,  Euseb.  Lib.IV.  c,14.p.  161, 


122 

enemy,"  says  be,  "  exposed  and  prostrated  hy 
the  coming  of  Christ— contrived  a  new  fraud 
that  he  might  deceive  the  thoughtless  under  the 
very  sanction  of  the  Christian  name.  He  invent- 
ed heresies  and  schisms,  that  he  might  subvert 
the  faith,  corrupt  the  truth,  and  rend  unity."'^ 
Gne  of  the  wajs,  then,  of  rending  the  unity  of 
the  church,  was  the  subversion  of  her  faith  ; 
which  is  the  effect  of  fundamental  errour,  and 
the  design  of  that  father  of  lies  from  whom 
it  proceeds. 

It  is  superfluous  to  multiply  quotations.  The 
very  term  heresy,  which  simply  signifies  divi- 
siOiN,  w^as  early  appropriated  to  false  doctrine^ 
for  this  very  reason,  that  the  bond  of  the  church's 
unity  is  faith  in  the  truth  ;  which  bond  nothing 
more  effectually  unties  than  the  propagation  of 

(?06^rm«/ FALSEHOOD. 

3d.  The  unity  of  the  primitive  church  was 
broken  by  uithdraiving  from  her  communion  ;  or 
which  was,  in  her  eyes,  the  same  thing,  the  set- 
ting up  of  separate  and  restricted  cQinmunions. 

If  custom,  which  reconciles  men  to  both  ab- 


*  Quid  vero  a?tutius,  quidve  subtillus,  'quarn  ut  Christi  advenlu  delec- 
tus ac  prostialus  IiviMicvi excogitaverit  novam  IVaudem,  ut  sub 

ipso  f  liristj  ni  n(  ii.inis  uiulo  failat  incautos?  Heereses  invenit  et 
sch  sniHla  quibtis  subverte-'et  tideta,  verit£.tem  corruniperet,  scinderet 
unitatem. 

.De  Unit.  Eccks.  Opp.  p.  105. 


123 

surdity  and  sin,  bad  not  familiarized  the  specta- 
cle of  evangelical  churches  ahenated  from,  arjd 
often  arrayed  against,  each  other— my  soul  shud- 
ders— in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  ! !  it  would 
].)e  inconceivable  how  the  idea  of  one  catholic 
CHURCH  can  be  dissevered  from  that  of  one  catho- 
lic COMMUNION.  That  union  should  not  be  a  ba- 
sis for  communion — that  "  particular  churches, 
which  are  members  of  the  cathoUc  church,"^  as 
parts  of  one  whole,  should,  in  their  church-capa- 
city, have  no  fellowship  with  each  other,  though 
they  constitute  but  one  body — nay,  that  such  fel- 
lowship should  be  unwholesome,  unholy,  unlaw- 
ful ;  although  as  parts  of  one  whole,  they  have 
the  very  same  means  of  life,  health,  vigour — is  so 
desperate  an  assault  upon  the  sense  of  consisten- 
cy— such  a  Leviathan  of  a  paradox,  that  the  fa- 
culties of  poor  human  nature  sink  beneath  it. 

None  of  the  ancients  blundered  in  this  style. 
Orthodox  or  heterodox,  they  agreed  in  one  point, 
viz.  that  different  communions  exclude  the  idea  of 
unity.  Hence,  on  the  one  hand,  the  Novatians. 
Liiciferjans^  DonatistSj  who  set  up  restrictive 
communions,  acted  upon  the  avowed  principle 
that  the  Catholic  church,  from  which  they  with- 
drew, had  ceased  to  be  the  church  of  Christ, 

^  Con.  of  Faith,  ch.  xxv.  4. 


124 

And,  on  the  other  hand,  they  who  condemned  the 
separatists,  held,  that  by  the  very  fact  of  their 
separate  communion,  they  threw  themselves  out 
of  the  church  of  God,  and  ceased  to  be  a  part 
of  her.  The  ground,  then,  upon  which  they  both 
r^tood,  is  this,  that  two  churches  refusing  com- 
munion with  each  other,  do  thereby  renounce 
their  relation  to  each  other  as  parts  of  a  com- 
mon whole :  and  that  it  is  idle  to  pretend  that 
the  public  unity  of  the  church  can  be  made  to 
consist  with  such  divisions. 

To  give  at  full  length  the  proofs  of  what  is 
here  advanced,  would  be  to  transcribe  a  large 
portion  of  the  works  of  some  of  the  early  fathers. 
It  is  assumed,  as  incontrovertible,  by  both  Cyprian 
and  Augustine,  in  their  respective  controversies 
w  ith  the  Novalians  and  Donatists ;  and  frequent- 
ly asserted  in  the  most  formal  and  unqualified 
manner.     A  specimen  shall  suflice. 

After  show  ing  from  the  scriptures  the  visible 
unity  of  the  church,  Cyprian  thus  demands : 

"  Does  he  who  maintains  not  this  unity,  ima- 
gine that  he  possesses  the  faith  ?  Does  he  who 
sets  himself  against  the  church,  cherish  a  confi- 
dence of  his  being  in  the  church  ?" — Again  : 
''  Whoever  is  disjoined  from  the  church, is  joined 
to  an  adulteress ;  is  separated  from  the  promises 
made  to  the  church.     Nor  can  that  man  attain 


125 

to  the  rewards  of  Christ,  who  leaves  the  church 
of  Christ.  He  is  an  ahen,  he  is  profane,  he  is  an 
enemy.'^*  Once  more.  "  Let  no  one,  brethren, 
cause  you  to  err  from  the  ways  of  the  Lord.  Let 
no  one  tear  you,  Christians,  from  the  gospel  of 
Christ.  Let  no  one  remove  from  the  church,  the 
church's  sons.  Let  them,  who  are  wiUing  to 
perish,  perish  by  themselves.  Let  them  who 
have  departed  from  the  church,  remain  without 
the  church,  alone. "f 

These  things  are  spoken  of  the  Novatians^  who 
were  not  accused  of  unsound  doctrine  ;  who 
carried  their  ecclesiastical  discipline  to  an  ex- 
cessive rigour;  and  who,  from  displeasure  at 
w^hat  they  accounted  the  laxness  of  the  church, 
in  dealing  with  the  "  lapsed,"  withdrew  from 
her  fellowship,  and  formed  a  church  and  com- 
munion of  their  own.   It  was  the  fact  of  this  se- 


*  Hanc  Ecclesia  unitatem  quinon  tenet,  tenere  se  fidem  credit?  Clui 
Eeclesiae  renititur  et  resistit,  in  Ecclesii  se  esse  confidit?  *  »  * 
Ctuiaquis  ab  Ecclesia  segregatus  adulteras  jungitur;  a  promissis  Ec«" 
clesiae  separatur.  Nee  pervenit  ad  Christi  praemia  qui  relinquit  Ee- 
clesiam  Christi.     Alienus  est,  profanus  est,  hostis  eat. 

Cyp.  de  Unitate  Eccles.  p.  108,  109. 

t  Nemo  vos,  fratres.  errare  a  Domini  viis  faciat.  Nemo  vos  Chris- 
tianos  ab  evangelic  Christi  rapiat.  Nemo  filios  Eeclesiae  de  Ecclesia 
tollat.  Pereantsibi  soli,  qui  perire  Toluerunt.  Extra  Eccjesiam  soli 
remaneant,  qui  de  Ecclesia  reces^ef aat. 

I».  Ep.  XLHI.  p,  84, 


126 

paration,  though  under  the  plea  of  cultivating 
and  preserving  a  higher  degre^of  purity,  which 
constituted  their  offence,  and  drew  upon  them 
the  general  indignation  of  the  church  of  God. 

In  a  similar  way  Augustiine  speaks  of  the  Do- 
natists  and  their  schism. 

"  They  who  imagine  that  their  own  denomi- 
nation is  now  clean  wheat,  have  flown  away 
from  the  mixture  of  chaff  and  wheat,  as  if  they 
were  pure  chaff:  and  they  who  think  that  they 
no  longer  feed  with  the  goats  under  one  shep- 
herd, are  severed,  by  the  stratagems  of  wolves, 
from  the  Lord's  flock  :  and  they  w^ho  suppose 
that  they  are  not  gathered  together  with  the  bad 
fish,  are  not  only  bad  fish  themselves,  but  have 
broken  the  nets  of  unity."* 

Jerome  also,  on  Eph.  4,  3.  observes  "Thi^^ 
place  bears  particularly  hard  upon  the  heretics, 
who  break  the  bond  of  peace ^  yet  think  that 
they  maintain  the  '  unity  of  the  Spirit ;'  whereas 
the  unity  of  the  Spirit  is  preserved  by  the  bond 


*  QXu  congt'pgationeni  suam  jam  fniraentum  purgatura  putcnt  e 
commixtione  fruraenti  et  paleffi  tanqTiam  pura  palea  volavernot :  et 
quf  se  sub  uno  pastore  n on  adhuc  ciiin  hffidis  pascere  sentiunt  lupo- 
rum  insidiis  de  grege  Doiu  ni  separati  sunt:  et  qui  cum  nialis  risci- 
bus  se  congregates  esse  non  •  utant,  non  soluin  uiali  p  sees  sunt,  sed 
etiam  unitatis  retia  diruperuut. 

Aug.  coni.Parm.  Lib.  III.  c.  3.  T.  vii.  65. 


127 

45f  peace.  For  when,  instead  of  concord  in  our 
professions,  we  cry  out,  I  am  ofPaul—IofApol- 
los — I  of  Cephas,  we  divide  the  unity  of  the  Spirit, 
and  rend  it  into  shreds."*  That  the  venerable  fa- 
ther meant  his  censure  should  attach,  with  pecu- 
liar force,  to  those  who  had  receded  from  the 
CathoHc  fellowship  of  the  church,  and  set  up 
for  themselves,  is  clear,  not  only  from  the  nature 
o£  his  argument,  but  also  from  his  sentiments  for- 
merly quoted. 

Innumerable  testimonies  of  the  same  sort  are 
at  hand,  but  shall  not  be  brought  forward :  as  the 
preceding  fully  establish,  we  believe,  the  position 
advanced  in  the  beginning  of  this  section,  viz. 
that  the  primitive  church  accounted  her  unity  to 
be  violated,  by  internal  schisms — ^bythe  renuncia- 
tion of  fmidamenial  truth — and  by  separate  comr 
mimions. 

There  remains  yet  a 

Third  Inquiry.  By  what  means  tvas  the  visible 
unity  of  the  primitive  church  preserved  and  pro- 
claimed ? 

*  Hie  locus  vel  maxime  adversum  liKreticos  facit :  qui,  pads  vinculo 
idissipalo  atque  corrupto,  putant  se  tenere  spiritus  unitatem  ;  cum  uni- 
tas  spiritus  m  pacis  vinculo  conservetur.  duando  enim  non  id  ipsum 
oranes  loquiuiui';  et  alius  dicit,  Ego  sum  Pauli — Ego  Apollo — Ego  Ce- 
p/tcB,  dividimus  spiritus  unitatem ;  et  earn  in  partes  ac  jnembra  disc^r- 
'xmus. 

HiEB.  Comment.  &d.  Epk.  IV.  5.  0pp.  T,  VI.  ITC 

17 


123 

The  answer  to  this  question  flows  so  naturally 
from  the  foregoing  discussioUj  that  it  might,  per- 
haps, be  left  to  the  reader's  own  inference.  But, 
to  prevent  uncertainty  or  mistakes,  it  shall  be 
given  distinctly. 

Her  unity,  then,  was  preserved  and  evinced, 
chiefly, 

1st.  By  an  inflexible  adherence  to  the  great 
truths  of  the  gospel,  as  summed  up  in  her 
creed.  Here  was  her  one  faith,  with  which  she 
permitted  no  tampering.  This  faith  her  mem- 
bers, all  the  world  over,  were  expected  and  re- 
quired, not  merely  to  abstain  from  denying,  which 
is  at  best  a  negative  assurance,  but  also  to  em- 
brace and  profess.  On  this  point  enough  has 
been  said  already. 

2d.  By  her  members'  conformity  to  the  cus- 
toms and  usages  of  any  particular  church  which 
they  mignt  happen  to  visit. 

No  local  or  national  peculiarities  were  allowed 
to  usurp  the  rank  of  terms  of  communion.  No 
small  fastidiousness  about  matters  which  afl*ect- 
ed  not  the  substance  of  the  Christian  profession, 
to  disturb  the  Christian  peace.  Whoever,  from 
ignorance,  vanity,  moroseness,  or  any  other  of 
those  deceits  which  clothe  a  factious  temper  in 
the  habiliments  of  holy  zeal,  and  hiipute  to  re- 
ligious prudery  the  virtues  of  a  tender  conscience, 


129 

made  a  noise  about  things  indifferent,  and  chose 
to  be  in  dudgeon  because  he  could  not  fashion 
the  worUl  after  his  own  image,  was  considered  as^ 
"  ministering  questions,  rather  than  godly  edify- 
ing ;"  as  being  more  a  scandal  than  an  ornament 
to  the  gospel.  This  point  also  has  been  suffi* 
ciently  handled  above. 

3d.  By  respecting  and  supporting  discipUne 
wheresoever  and  by  whomsoever,  within  hei 
pale,  inflicted. 

A  person  censured  by  one  church  was,  of 
course,  excluded  from  every  other.  No  petitions^ 
penitence,  complaint,  or  other  expedient,  could 
avail  for  his  admission  without  reconciliation  to 
the  church  by  which  he  had  been  censured.  It 
was  inconceivable  to  these  Christian  "elders,'' 
how  a  sentence  of  one  court  of  Christ's  kingdom 
should  not  bo  held  valid  and  sacred  by  every 
other.  To  own  a  church  as  a  member  of  the 
church  catholic,  and  yet  to  disregard,  or  revise 
her  acts  of  discipline,  is  an  inconsistency  into 
which  they  were  cautious  of  falling.  It  was,  in 
their  eyes,  equivalent  to  rejecting  her  ministry 
and  ordinances.  So  that  whatever  subordinate 
differences  might  subsist  between  them,  whilo 
they  acknowledged  each  other  as  true  churches, 
they  never  thought  of  interfering  with  each 
other's  judicial  acts  ;  or  of  releasing  from^  f^^n- 


130 

nme  each  others  offenders.  Thus  they  reclpro- 
eated  confidence,  and  imparted  mutual  strength, 
declared  their  social  union,  and  drew,  by  their 
combined  efforts,  a  line  of  defence  round  the 
"  city  of  God."  So  thoroughly  was  this  maxim 
understood,  and  so  generally  applied,  that  "when 
Pope  ZosiMus  and  Celestine  took  upon  them 
to  receive  appellants  from  the  African  churches, 
and  absolve  those  whom  they  had  condemned, 
St.  Austin  and  all  the  African  churches  sharply 
remonstrated  against  this  as  an  irregular  practice, 
violating  the  laws  of  unity,  and  the  settled  rules 
of  ecclesiastical  commerce,  W'hich  required. 
That  no  delinquent^  excommunicated  in  one  churchy 
should  he  absolved  in  another^  without  giving  satis- 
faction to  his  own  church  that  censured  him,''''^ 

4th.  By  holding  ministerial  and  Christian  com- 
munion with  all  true  churches,  as  opportunity 
offered.  That  is  to  say,  every  church  received 
into  communion  as  fully  as  her  own  immediate 
members,  ministers  and  private  Christians,  from 
any  and  every  other  church  under  the  whole 
heaven,  upon  evidence  of  their  good  standing : 
which  evidence,  when  they  were  not  otherwise 
sufficiently  known,  was  furnished  by  letters  of 
recommendation,  or  what  we  call  testimonials  or 

*  E'NGH  AM,  B.  XVI.Scc.  14.  Yol.  II.  p.  20.  Fol.  with  the  authon^ 
ties  there  cited. 


certificates,  from  their  respective  churches.  And^ 
on  the  other  hand,  ministers  and  private  Chris- 
tians deemed  it  their  duty,  and  made  it  their 
practice,  to  join  in  communion  with  whatever 
church  they  might  happen  to  visit  in  any  part  of 
the  world. 

A  strong  example  of  this  communion  was 
quoted  before,  in  the  case  of  Polycarp  of 
Smyrna^  and  Anicetus  of  Rome  ;  and  that  at  a 
time  when  there  existed  warm  disputes  between 
the  Asiatic  and  European  churches.*  The  strain 
of  the  whole  narrative  in  Eusebius,  shows  that 
this  was  not  an  exception  to,  but  an  instance  of, 
the  ascertained  and  undisputed  rule  of  church- 
fellowship.  As,  indeed,  a  very  simple  considera- 
tion fully  proves.  For  the  very  intention  of  Po  - 
LYCARp's  journey  to  Rome  was,  to  prevent  the 
commxinion  of  the  Catholic  church  being  broken  by 
subordinate  differences :  and  he  succeeded ;  so 
that  the  peace  of  the  whole  church  was  preserv- 
ed. In  token  whereof,  he  not  only  communica- 
ted with  the  church  of  Rome,  but,  at  the  request 
of  Anicetus,  dispensed  the  Lord's  supper :  oof* 
of  the  highest  acts  of  ministerial  communion. 

The  whole  correspondence  between  the  Afri- 
can and  Roman  churches,  as  contained  in  the 


letters  to  and  from  Cyprian,  is  conducted  upon 
the  same  principle.  Of  this  any  one  will  be  sa- 
tisfiedj  who  shall  take  the  trouble  to  peruse  them. 
He  will  perceive,  that  the  proof  of  this  assertion 
lies  rather  in  their  general  cast  and  spirit,  and  in 
their  obviously  supposing  thefact^  than  in  particu- 
lar expressions.     A  proof  of  all  others  the  most 
decisive  with  those  who  know  how  to  estimate 
proof.    A  particular  witness  may  err  or  deceive  : 
but  public  transactions  between  social  bodies, 
such  as  organized  churches,  bearing  upon  their 
face  the  most  intimate  and  confidential  co  ope- 
ration with  regard  to  their  most  sacred  internal 
concerns,  and  those  as  forming  one  common  in- 
terest, preclude  mistake  and  doubts,  as  to  the 
fact  of  their  social  communion.     Such   is   the 
character  of  the  transactions  mentioned  in  the 
correspondence  of  Cyprian.     It  cannot,  there- 
fore, be  produced  at  length  here,  because  that 
would  require  the  transcription  of  a  volume.  But 
for  the  sake  of  those  to  %vhom  a  case  is  more  sa- 
tisfactory than  a  principle^   I  subjoin  an  extract 
from  Cyprian's  thirtysecond  epistle,  written  to 
the  Presbyteis  and  Deacons  of  Carthage  during 
his  exile. 

Speaking  of  the  letters  which  he  had  addressed 
to  the  clergy  at  Rome,  and  of  their  answers  i:.e 
??ays,  "  Be  as  careful  as  possible,  that  what  both 


I  and  they  have  written,  be  made  known  to  the 
brethren.  And,  moreover,  if  there  should  be 
present  with  }*ou,  or  should  happen  to  arrive,  any 
foreign  Bishops,  my  colleagues,  or  Presbyters,  or 
Deacons,  let  them  hear  the  whole.  And  should 
they  wish  copies  of  these  letters  to  carry  back  to 
their  connexions,  aid  them  in  the  transcription  : 
although  I  have  charged  our  brother  Saturus, 
the  Reader,  to  let  all  who  may  desire  it  have  an 
opportunity  of  transcribing  them,  that  somehow 
or  other  adjusting,  in  the  interim,  the  state  of  the 
churches,  one  harmonious  plan  may  be  pursued 
by  all."* 

Two  things  appear  to  be  settled  by  this  letter: 
(1.)  Cyprian  w^ould  hardly  dignify  with  the 
appellation  of  his  "  colleagues,"  or  invite  to  co- 
operation with  himself  in  the  affair^  of  his  oivn 
church,  ministers  with  whom  he  did  not,  or  would 
not,  hold  communion, 

(2.)  As  these  ministers,  to  whom  his  correspon- 

*  Vos  curate  quantum  potestis  pro  diligenti  vestra,  ut  scripta  nos- 

tra»et  Hlorum  rescripta  fratribus  nostris  innotescant.  Sed  et  si  qui  de 

peregrmis  Episcopi  Collegse  niei,  vel  Presbyteri,  vel  Biacones  praesen- 

tes  fuerint,  vel  supervenerint,  heee  omnia  de  vobis  audiant ;  et  si  exem- 

pla  epistolarura  transcribere,  et  ad  suos  perferre  voluerint,  facultatera 

transcriptionis  accipiant.     Quamvis  et  Saturo  Lectori  fratri  nostro 

mandaverini,  ut  singulis  desiderautibus  descr;bendi  faciat  potestatem, 

ut  in  Ecclesiarum  statu  quoquomodo  interim  componendo  servetur 

omnibus  una  et  fida  consensio. 

Cyp.  ep.  S2.  ed.  Fell.  p.  6.1 


dence  with  the  Roman  mhiistiy  was  to  be  Im- 
parted, belonged  neither  to  the  African  nor  Ro- 
man church,  but  w^ere  "  foreigners,"  (jperegrinis) 
it  is  clear,  that  the  most  intimate  ministerial  com- 
munications w^as  maintained  with  churches  of 
dilTerent  nations  and  distant  places. 

Observations  like  those  upon  Cyprian's  gene- 
ral correspondence,  are  applicable  to  the  letters 
of  Atkanasius,  wTitten  at  various  times  to  va- 
rious individuals,  orders,  and  churches.  But,  for 
brevity's  sake  here  also, one  example  shall  suffice: 
^-  There  frequently  comes  to  the  city,  a  man 
well  qualified  to  preach  in  Greek.  Whoever 
study  the  gratification  of  their  ears,  hasten  to 
church,  not  to  get  healing  to  their  souls,  but 
merely  to  catch  the  beauty  of  the  composition.* 
The  eloquent  speaker  goes  away  ;  these  tares 
also  go  from  the  church,  for  they  have  nothing  of 
the  wheat,  notliinir  of  faith.  But  the  believer, 
however  elegantly  the  preacher  speaks,  makes  it 
his  business  to  attend  to  what  is  said,  whether  it 
be  in  the  Syrian ,  Roman,  or  any  other  tongue. 


*  That  evil  disease,  the  religious  itch,  vrhich  impoverishes  the  sojjtl 
to  tickle  the  ear,  is  not  only  of  long  standing,  but  of  inveterate  malig- 
nity. None  languish  more  pitiably  under  its  venom  than  those  who 
wish  to  bethought  eUpanf  Christians.  Let  them  pause — they  are  like- 
ly to  pay  dear  for  a  worthless  gratification  ;  as  "itching  ears"  natu- 
rally '•  turn  away  from  the  truth,  and  ars  turned  ftsto  faelfs." 


135 

For  he  regards  the  matter^  not  the  words)''* 
Alexandria^  the  city  to  which  Athanasius  al- 
ludes, was  the  metropolis  of  what  is  known  in 
history  as  the  Egyptian  Diocesc.-f 

From  this  extract,  it  is  clear,  that  the  churches 
of  Egypt,  Syria,  Italy,  Greece,  and  indeed  of  the 
whole  world,  held  Christian  and  ministerial  com- 

*  UA^A-ytviTAi  rrcKKctK.ig  s/c  iTroKty  a.v>i^  tTuvsL/uivoc  S'iTucrKUv  Hxxuvte-Tl. 
*0  THV  Anonv  QiKyo/Aivoc  a-TnuSu  uc  t»v  iKKK»<riaLv,  cu  thv  tstT^uctv  rue 
4^X"^>  AA^sfc  rav  hcyav  to  kxkxoc  fxovov  d^^dLo-Ai.   Avs^'^w^was;'  I  VjyXaT- 

Toia-iirrsv.  'O  cTs  .-ar/sTTc?,  Kdiv  {vy?.^tTra>?(^a)  kiy»y  ret  Kiyofxiyn  (nrov^dt.- 
^tt  KitruKivirr  K^v  1.vgi<rrij  kav  Paudnmj  kav  ^tu^po^o)  y^wrrn' cv  yug 
^itrii  hoyovc^  iLKh'  i^yx. 

Athan.  Horn,  dc  *Se???f»/e,'  Opp.  T.  II.  63. 

ed.  Benedict.  1693.  Fol, 

t  Dioecesis  Ae'j:yptiaca.  According  to  Bingham,  the  Archbishop 
of  Alexandria,  (at  tliis  time  Athanasius  himself,)  by  whom  the 
diocese  was  governed,  had  under  him  not  only  about  one  hundred  bi- 
shops, but  it  seems  also,  subordinate  Metropolitans  or  Archbishops  ; 
so  as  '*  to  have  the  ordering  of  ecclesiastical  matters  throughout  all 
'*  Egypt,  Thebais,  Martoles,  Libya,  Ammoniaca,  3Iareotis,  and  PentoL-' 
^^ polls ;^^  i.e.  a  district  comprehending  several  large  provinces,  ex- 
ceeding together  nine  hundred  miles  in  length,  and  five  hundred  in 
breadth.  Was  this  too  an  apostolic  ordinance  ?  Was  this  no  alteration. 
in  the  primitive  order  of  the  ehurch  ?  Yet  we  see  that  it  did  not  break 
communion. 

(a)  Vide  Cotelerii  annot.  ad  Const,  Apost.  Lib.  IT.  c.  58.  T.  I.  p.  2«9,  This  learned 
editor  proposes  to  amend  the  text  of  Athanasius,  by  adding,  after  £y>A»TT*c,  the 
words  ^f  ii^XoTTftf,  so  as  to  l•^\'^d  "whether  elegantly  or  inekgantly."  But  the 
addiiiou  is  unneeessaiy,  if  not  hurtiul,  to  the  sense:  the  point  of  which  is,  that  serious 
Christian.'?  are  not  to  be  put  ofi  with  theeJoquenct  of  stiie  or  manner.  They  look  for 
something  more  and  something  better.  They  look  for  their  spiritual  food  in  the  "doc- 
lirine  which  is  according  to  Godliness."  1  his  will  compensate  theia  for  the  want  of  ^e 
clo'^ution,  but  thefincrt  elocution  wIU  not  compensate  fos  tihe  want  of  this, 

18 


136 

nninion  with  each  other,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
when  opportunities  occurred. 

But  not  to  multiply  authorities  which  might 
be  tedious  to  the  reader,  and  to  put  this  point  at 
once  bejond  all  question,  there  is,  in  the  com- 
pilation called  the  Apostolical  constitutions^  a 
chapter  with  the  following  title: 

"  Concerning  letters  of  recommendation  brought 
by  STUAf^GEB-S  J  whether  of  the  Laity  J  Clergy,  or 
Bishops  ;  and  that  there  should  be  no  distinction ^^'^ 
viz.  betw^een  them  and  the  members,  whether 
lay  or  clerical,  of  the  church  to  which  they 
come. 

The  chapter  then  proceeds  : 

"  If  there  come  from  a  church  abroad  bre- 
thren or  sisters  with  credentials,  let  the  deacon 
make  the  proper  incjuiry  respecting  them,  whe- 
ther they  profess  the  faith,  belong  to  the 
church,  and  be  not  contaminated  with  heresy. 
And  again,  if  a  woman,  whether  she  be  married  or 
a  widow.  And  thus  having  ascertained  that  they 
are  sound  in  the  faith,  and  of  one  accord  with  the 
church  in  the  things  of  the  Lord,  let  him  con- 
duct every  one  to  his  proper  place.  Should  a 
presbyter  come  from  abroad,  let  him  be  received 
into  official  communion  by  the  presbyters.  If  a 
deacon,  by  the  deacon.  If  a  bishop,  let  him 
take  his  seat  with  the  bishop,  being  accounted 


137 

by  him  as  worthy  of  equal  honour.  And  thou 
shalt  request  him,  O  bishop,  to  address  the  people 
in  the  ivord  of  doctrine.  For  exhortation  and  ad- 
monition by  strangers  is  acceptable,  and  in  the 
highest  degree  useful.  For  no  prophet,  saith 
Christ,  is  accepted  in  his  own  country.  Thou 
shalt  also  employ  him  to  offer  the  eucharist :  And 
should  he,  out  of  respect  to  thee,  with  a  view, 
like  a  wise  man,  to  maintain  thy  honour,  de- 
cline this  service,  thou  shalt  insist  that  he  at  least 
bless  the  people. "^"^^ 

Although  these  "  Constitutions''  are  not 
of  apostolic  authority,  as  the  erratic  and  fan- 
ciful Whiston  imagined,!  preferring  them 
even  above  the   writings  of  a  single   apostle ;{ 

*  Ei  S'i  Ttc  Aiaro  ^ci^otKictc  aS'iXfoc  n  aiS'ih<p»  i^ex^in  irvret<riv  i'nrtKoy.i^o- 
fiivcty  J'l'j.Kovoc  i^a-tK^mTO)  rst  KctT  ct'jTOugy  etvefAgivceV  it  TsriTOh  iKKKixnATl- 
KOI,  u  [AH  a.ts-0  eCt^io-iusi  mri  fji.iuc>xv<ry.ivoi.     Y^ett  -arctx/v,  ii  itirctvSgoi  «  ;^^«/)«f 

^  CUT&)  ^VOVC  T*  KClT  etUTOUCy  Wf  tlCTtV  St?.»3-»f  nSTfTOt  ^  OfAOyVafAOVii  £V  TO/? 
K'J^tAiC:JiCy   ATTAyiTCeiKA^-OV  itiTOV  'W^Oa-ttKiVTA  etUTU'TQ'WCV.       Et  i'i  i/WiiiT- 

^v7£§o?  Aoro  TTAgoiKtA?  iifiK^oty  ^goaSi^sa-Bo)  C'Oro  ruv  'sr^nT/SvltPiev  Koivcel- 
xor  gi  cTe /"ifitxivo?,  C"aro  toov  S'iakovuv  u  S'i  itiria-KO<aro;y  c-jv  T<i>  i/nria-KOTra 
xAd-e^icrdai,  t»?  Au^ng  A^tovfxivoc  'jrsr'  avtov  ri/umt.  Kai  igama-ut  avtov, 
a)  i'ariffx.o'we^  fargoa-KAhnrAi  tu>  kaco  Kcycu?  SiJ^aktikov;'  »  yAp  tmv  Ptvav  tta- 
gAKhna-t;  Xj  vcud-itrtA  iwwAg^S'iKTOi  ^  atpuKifAWTArn  (t^hS'pa.  OuA/?  yAP 
argcipjiTw?,  (pucrtv,  cTskto?  tv  t«  i^ta,  tnrATgiS't.     'E.Tmgi'^m  /'  AVT(i,  g  T/jv  ey- 

X^giriAV  AVOtC-Al'iAV  S'iy  cT;'  iUAA^UAV,  ^S  (TCfOf,  TIJV  TtfAHV  (TOt  mgOoVi  (Ail 
^iXyilTi]  AViViyKAlf  KAV  US  TOV  KAOV  iUKoytAV  AVTCV  TrilHa-AO-BAl  KATA- 
fAyKSLCrU;. 

Const.  App.  Lib,  II.  c.  58.  ap.  PP.  App.  ed.  CoTEr,» 
Tom.  I.  p.  268,  9, 
i  WHisTos's^prm.  Christianity  rrvived,    Vol^  TIL  p.  11, 
-t  lb.  p-  4. 


138 

but  the  work  of  some  pretender  two  centu- 
ries later,  as  the  learned  for  the  most  part 
agree ;  yet  they  clearly  show  what  >Tas  the  state 
of  the  church  respecting  communion  at  the  time 
they  were  composed ;  and  what  was  the  current 
opinion  concerning  her  uniform  practice.  Little 
stress,  indeed,  is  to  be  laid  on  that  opinion,  sim- 
ply as  such  :  for  it  was  undeniably  erroneous  in 
some  other  things  of  moment.  But  as  it  coin- 
cides with  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  the  unity  of 
the  church,  as  well  as  with  facts  established  by 
different  witnesses,  it  is  entitled  to  more  than  or- 
dinary credit  in  the  present  argument.  The 
mere  factof  this  catholic  communion,  both  Chris- 
tian and  ministerial,  being  so  sedulously  kept  up 
in  the  third  or  fourth  century,  furnishes  an  al- 
most demonstrative  proof  that  it  was  so  from  the 
beginning.  Human  vanity  and  policy  breed 
discord,  not  peace ;  put  asunder  what  God  has 
joined  ;  never  join  what  the  Devil  has  put  asun- 
der. So  that  the  one  communion  of  the  church, 
being  directly  contrary  to  the  corruption  of  man 
and  the  interest  of  hell,  could  never  have  existed 
without  the  ordinance  and  operation  of  God. 

It  has  now  been  proved,  we  hope,  to  the  con- 
viction of  the  reader,  that  the  communion  for 
which  these  pages  plead,  viz.  the  free  and  full 
interchange  of  fellowship  in  all  evangelical  ordi- 


139 

nances,  between  believers  of  eveiy  name,  on 
the  broad  basis  of  their  agreement  in  the  sub- 
stantial doctrines  of  the  cross,  is  precisely  that 
communion  which  was  maintained  in  the  primi- 
tive church,  beginning  with  the  days  and  the 
example  of  the  Apostles  themselves.  The  local 
and  party  exceptions  to  this  general  position  are 
furnished  bv  the  Novatians,  Donatists  and  Luci- 
ferians^  who  have  already  been  noticed.  The 
two  former  brought  the  principle  of  catholic 
communion  to  a  rigorous  test:  and  the  discus- 
sions respecting  their  schisms,  terminated,  as  we 
have  seen,  in  its  triumph  as  a  principle  of  the 
most  sacred  obligation.  The  sect  of  Luciferians^ 
so  named  from  Lucifer^  bishop  of  CagUari^  in  Sar- 
dinia^  was  too  feeble  and  ephemeral  to  attract 
regard  on  the  general  question.  The  same  re- 
mark applies  to  those  very  partial  suspensions  of 
communion  which  arose  most  frequently  from 
personal  considerations ;  and  were  rather  effusions 
of  passion  and  spleen,  than  expressions  of  opi- 
nion deliberately  adopted,  or  authoritative  pre- 
cedents likely  to  be  followed.  They  were  just 
sufficient  to  show  the  strength  of  the  ties  which 
they  endeavoured  to  break ;  and  to  establish  the 
doctrine  which  they  might  be  quoted  to  discre- 
dit.    That  doctrine,  which  the  present  argument 


HO 

aims  to  revive  and  recommend  ;  and  which  the 
authour  is  confident  no  materiaUsiCis  c^n  be  found 
to  invalidate. 

Here,  then,  we  take  leave  of  the  primitive 
church.  Even  in  the  fourth  century  many  grievous 
abuses  had  sprung  up,  groAvn  rank,  and  brought 
forth  their  poisonous  fruit,  especially  in  her  wor- 
ship and  government.  The  policy  of  Con- 
STANTiNE  which  sccularizcd  her  form ;  his  pro- 
fusion, which  corrupted  her  virtue ;  and  the  me- 
retricious attire  which  banished  her  modesty,  pre- 
pared her  for  rapid  infidelities  to  her  Lord,  and 
for  her  final  prostitution  to  the  Man  of  Sin. 
From  the  fifth  century  may  be  dated  that  career 
of  shame  which,  particularly  in  the  Western  em- 
pire, she  ran,  with  wild  incontinence,  through 
the  night  of  the  "  dark  ages  ;"  until  she  was 
branded  from  above  as  the  "  Mother  of  Har- 
lots AND  ABOMINATIONS  OF  THE  EARTH. "^ 

To  carry  down  the  induction  of  facts  during 
these  opprobrious  centuries,  would  be  an  idle 
expenditure  of  time  and  toil,  as  its  results  would 
be  of  no  value  in  the  eyes  of  those  for  whom 
these  pages  are  penned.  Omitting  them  altoge- 
ther, we  resume  our  thread  at  that  eventful 
crisis,  when  the  faithful  remnant  heard  and  obey- 
ed the  m_andate   of  their   God.     "  Come  out  of 


Ilex 


141 

her^  my  people^  that  ye  be  not  partakers  of  her 
sins^  and  that  ye  receive  not  of  her  plagues, '^'^'^ 

The  reader  perceives  at  once,  that  we  allude 
to  the  Reformation  from  Popery. 

All  who  are  conversant  with  the  histoiy  of  that 
stupendous  revolution,  know  that  it  turned  main- 
ly on  two  points,  viz.  ih^  faith  and  ivorship  of  the 
church.  The  one  was  to  be  reclaimed  from  its 
manifold  perversions ;  and  the  other  to  be  disen- 
cumbered of  a  monstrous  ritual.  By  the  first, 
the  light  of  life  in  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  was 
almost  extinguished :  and  by  the  second,  men 
were  bowed  dow  n  under  a  load  of  superstitions 
which  Fraud  had  been  accumulating  for  ages 
upon  the  back  of  IgnoraxNce.  Both  these  evils 
were  to  be  remedied.  Truth  was  to  be  restored 
to  her  purity,  and  w^orship  to  her  simplicity.  The 
minds  of  men  w^ere  to  be  liberated  from  their 
bondage,  and  the  word  of  God  to  reassume  its 
authority.  Tradition  was  to  fall  under  the  sword 
of  the  commandment;  and,  "Thus  saith  the 
Lord,"  to  dissipate  the  figments  of  the  elders. 
The  mantle  of  the  Apostles  fell  upon  the  Re 
formers ;  while  the  "  Spirit  of  judgment  and  of 
burning,"  both  enhghtened  their  path,  and  de- 
voured the  thorns  and  briars  which  impeded 
their  march. 

•  *  Rer,  xyjii.  4» 


142 

The  interests  which  they  rose  to  vindicate  ; 
the  severity  of  the  Contlict  which  they  had  to 
sustain;  and  the  long  train  of  consequences 
which  were  to  flow  from  their  measures,  called 
forth  that  mighty  talent,  magnanimous  feeling, 
and  elevated  principle,  which  have  nothing  to 
throw  away  upon  trifles  ;  but  endless  treasures  of 
intellect  and  toil,  of  suffering  and  blood,  to  la- 
vish in  the  cause  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  Protestant  churches,  therefore,  from 
the  Reformation  downwards,  shall  furnish  our 

Third  class  of  facts. 

On  the  several  points  enumerated  above,  viz. 
defective  moral  discipline — different  rites  of  wor- 
ship— different  views  of  external  order — ^^and  dif- 
ferent opinions  in  subordinate  doctrines,  there 
was  a  marked  coincidence  between  the  views  of 
the  Reformers  and  of  the  primitive  Christians  ; 
both  agreeing  that  they  are  not  sufficient  grounds 
of  disunion  among  Christians,  nor  of  their  ex- 
cluding each  other  from  the  most  tender  and 
ample  fellowship  in  the  things  of  God.  In  the 
ease  of  the  Reformers,  this  is  the  more  worthy 
of  notice,  as  a  proof  of  their  having  imbibed 
the  pure  spirit  of  the  gospel ;  seeing  they  did  not, 
like  the  first  heralds  of  the  cross,  issue  from  one 
nation,  and  one  spot,  with  simuhaneous  com- 
missions, and  after  having  been  educated  toge= 


143 

ther  for  several  years  by  the  master  himself:  but 
were  of  different  countries,  languages,  habits, 
prejudices;  many  of  them  absolute  strangers  to 
each  other,  yet  all  drawing  their  doctrines  out  of 
the  one  well  of  salvation — the  holy  scripture. 
Their  concord,  therefore,  in  matters  about  which 
they  had  no  guide  but  the  word  of  God,  can 
hardly  be  attributed  to  another  cause  than  hi3 
^'  sending  forth  his  hght  and  his  truth."  And 
they  did  declare  themselves,  very  abundantly, 
both  in  word  and  deed,  upon  the  subject  now 
before  us. 

Their  adversaries,  the  Papists,  from  whose 
communion  they  had  separated,  denied  their 
whole  claim  to  the  character  of  Christian 
churches.  To  repel  such  a  charge,  it  was  ne- 
cessary to  determine  from  the  word  of  God  what 
constitutes  the  true  church ;  to  give  its  distinctive 
marks;  and  to  show  that  they  belonged  to  it 
themselves.  In  doing  this,  they  fixed  upon  such 
characteristics  as  are  common,  even  at  the  pre^ 
sent  hour,  to  all  the  churches  of  Reformed  Chris- 
tendom, which  have  not  lost  the  faith  of  the 
Trinity  and  the  atonement*  These  characteris- 
tics are  generally  summed  up,  in  their  confessions, 
under  two  heads —  / 

1st.  The  pure  doctrine  of  the  gospel.  / 

M.  Th^  right  administration  of  the  «acrar 
19 


144 

"  The  Church,"  says  the  Augustan  confessiorK^ 
drawn  up  by  Melancthon,  in  1530,  revised  by 
Luther  and  other  divines,  and  published  as  the 
authentic  expression  of  the  Lutheran  faith, 
"  The  church,  properly  so  called,  has  her  signs, 
viz.  the  pure  and  sound  doctrine  of  the  gospel, 
and  the  right  use  of  the  sacraments ;  and  for  the 
true  unity  of  the  Church,  it  is  sufficient  to  agree  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  and  the  right  use  of  the 
sacraments, "^"^^  That  such  was  the  sense  of  the 
Protestant  vi^orld,  is  evident  from  the  testimonies 
referred  to  in  the  margin,  which  are  not  tran- 
scribed, as  it  would  only  be  a  series  of  tauto- 
logiesy  the  very  same  thing  being  asserted  nearly 
ip  the  same  words.f  What  is  meant  by  the  "  pure 
gospel,'^  and  the  due  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments, must  be  ascertained  from  the  confessions 


*  Habet  Ecclesia  proprie  dicta,  signa  sna,  scilicet,  puram  et  sanam 
cvangelii  doctriuam,  et  rectum  usum  sacramentoruni.  Et  ad  verara 
unitatem  ecclesiae  satis  est  consentire  de  doctrinaevangelii,  et  admi- 
tiistratione  Sacramentorum. 

Syntag  :  Conf.  p.  2.  p.  13.  Art.  conf.  vii. 
t  See  apud  Syntagma  confessionum. 
Co>FEfeS.  Argentinens:  A.  D.  1530    Synt.part  1,  p.  2i9 

2  248 

184 

1  lOT 

130 

53 

150 


BOHOEMIC : 

1535 

WlBTEMBURG  : 

1551 

Gallican: 

1561 

Anglic  : 

1562 

Helvet  : 

1566 

ScoTic : 

1568 

145 

themselves.     That  they  vary  in  certain  particu- 
lars ;  some  being  more  full,   and  others   more 
brief;  some  more,  and  others  less  precise  :  some 
having  what  others  want ;  and  some  even  main- 
taining, in' secondary  matters,  what  has  not  the 
sanction  of  the  rest,  is  unquestionable.     It  would 
have  been  a  wonder  equal  to  the  fable  of  the  se- 
venty-two translators  of  the  Old  Testament  in- 
to  Greek,*   had   no   such   diversity  happened. 
But  nothing  can  be  more  clear  or  consoUng  than 
their  harmony  in  all  the  leading  doctrines  of  the 
gospel,  which  areknowTiat  this  day  as  the  doc- 
trines OF   THE  Reformation.      Around  these 
Christians  rallied  with  one  heart  and  one  soul 
These  were  the  basis  of  their  union  and  com- 
munion.    Nor  is  there  -ach  a  thing  as  a  sectarian 
note  of  the  church  to  be  found  either  among  their 
public  instruments  of  profession,  or  in  any  pro- 
testant  writer  of  eminence,  with  whom  the  au- 
thouris  acquainted,  whether  of  that  or  of  a  sub- 
sequent age. 


*  The  story  is,  that  Plokmy  Philadelphus,  king  of  Egypt,  about 
two  centuries  and  a  half  before  Christ,  shut  up  seventy-two  learned 
Jews,  who  had  been  sent  from  Jerusalem  to  translate  the  law,  in  se- 
venty-two different  cells,  till  they  had  finished  their  translation:  Avhen, 
mirabiledidu!  the  seventy-two  versions  agreed /Aroug/ioMrm  ei^cr^/  tit- 
tie,  even  to  the  very  words  II"  See  Justin  :  i\URTYR :  cohort,  ad  Gmcos, 
p.  T3.  ed.  Grabe.  8vo,  1703. 


146 

Now  that  they  judged  their  concord  in  the  ca- 
pital articles  of  faith  to  be  sufficient  for  every 
purpose  of  Christian  unity  and  fellowship,  is 
plain  from  their  obvious  intention,  which  w  as,  to 
justify  themselves  and  their  principles  from  the 
calumnies  of  their  adversaries.  The  great  crime 
with  which  they  were  charged  w^as  their  re- 
nouncing THE  church.  They  w^ere  stigmatised  as 
schismatics,  heretics,  fanatics,  apostates,  profli- 
gates. They  replied,  that  their  departure  was 
a  matter  not  of  choice,  but  of  necessity  ;  that 
they  had  no  alternative  but  to  part  with  popery 
or  with  piety ;  to  put  their  souls  in  jeopardy,  or  to 
withdraw  from  Rome :  and  that  instead  of  apos- 
tatising from  Jesus  Christ,  they  were  only  re- 
turning to  the  ancient  faith  which  Rome  had  for- 
saken. They  accordingly  laid  open  her  abomi- 
nations to  the  world  ;  and  wdth  their  bible  in  the 
one  hand,  and  their  confession  in  the  other,  they 
proclaimed  the  truth  which  is  "according  to  god- 
liness." Certainly,  if  it  was  to  enjoy  this  truth, 
and  the  worship  connected  with  it,  that  they 
broke  communion  with  Rome,  their  very  act  de- 
elares  it  to  be  the  ground  of  communion  with  each 
other  ;  for  if  it  were  not  so,  and  so  view^ed,  they 
would  have  been  self-convicted  of  having  lost  the 
church  of  God  in  their  zeal  to  reform  her,  inas- 
inuch  ?is  they  would  not  have  retained  enough  to 


147 

erect  a  church-communion.  But  if  they  were  not 
guilty  of  such  folly ;  if  they  committed  no  such 
ridiculous  suicide,  as  every  Protestant  will  insist ; 
then  it  follows  that  the  doctrines  of  their  confes- 
sions being  substantially  the  same,  and  exclud- 
ing, often  avowedly,  their  other  differences  as  not 
essential,  were,  in  their  own  eyes,  the  true  and 
broad  foundation  of  church-communion. 

This  conclusion  grows  out  of  the  veiy  structure 
of  their  confessions  ;  but  they  have  fortified  it  by 
declarations  which  are  of  the  nature,  and  almost 
in  the  form  of  a  protest  against  disunion,  on  ac- 
count of  those  peculiar  features  w  hich  may  dis- 
tinguish the  churches  of  one  country  or  name 
from  those  of  another,  without  infringing  upon 
their  common  faith.  All  such  peculiarities,  whe- 
ther in  government,  worship,  discipline,  manners, 
or  modifications  of  doctrine,  they  held  to  be  sub- 
jects of  brotherly  forbearance  ;  and  no  just  cause 
of  dissension,  far  less  of  sectarian  communion. 
On  the  contrary,  like  the  primitive  christians, 
they  raaiiitained,  that  the  one  church  of  God,  scat- 
tered over  the  whole  earth,  ought  to  have  but  one 
communion.  So  that  whoever  is  in  communign 
with  one  part  of  the  Catholick  church,  is,  by  this 
very  fact,  in  communion  with  every  other  part, 
and  is  so  to  be  acknowledged,  received,  and 
cherished. 


148 

Lest  I  should  be  thought  to  e,Kaggerate,  they 
shall  speak  for  themselves. 

The  AuGSBuuGH  confession,  (A.  D.  1530,) 
"  condemns  the  Donatists  and  their  like."*  Now 
the  Donatists^  as  was  shown  above,  broke  oft* 
from  the  Catholick  church  on  pretence  of  her 
having  bad  men  in  her  communion,  and  even  in 
her  ministry.  This,  say  the  Lutheran  Protestants, 
was  not  a  sufficient  cause :  they  of  course  con- 
demn all  those  churches  who  refuse  communion 
with  others  on  account  of  defective  moral  disci- 
pline. 

"The  Belgic  confession,  i.  e.  of  Calvinist  Pro- 
testants in  the  United  Provinces,  (1561,)  thus 
lays  down  their  faith  respecting  the  church : 

"  We  believe  and  confess  one  catholick  or  uni- 
versal church  ;  which  is  the  true  congregation  or 
assembly  of  all  faithful  Christians  who  expect 
their  whole  salvation  from  Christ  Jesus  alone  ; 
as  they  are  washed  in  his  blood,  and  sanctified 
and  sealed  by  his  Spirit.  This  holy  church  is  li- 
mited to  no  particular  })lace  or  person,  but  is 
vspread  over  the  whole  earth  ;  yet,  through  the 
power  of  faith,  is  joined  and  united,  all  of  it,  by 
affection  and  will,  in  one  and  the  same  spirit. 

"  We  believe,  that  since  this  sacred  assembly 
and  congregation  consists  of  those  who  shall  be 

"*  Art.  viH. 


149 

saved,  and  there  is  no  salvation  out  of  it,  no  per- 
son, of  whatever  rank  or  dignity,  may  withdraw 
himself  therefrom,  so  as  to  live  separately  content- 
ed tvith  his  oivn  custom  only.  But  on  the  contra- 
ry, that  all  are  bound  to  join  themselves  to  this 
assembly,  and  carefully  to  preserve  the  unity  of  the 
churchy  and  freely  to  submit  themselves  to  her 
doctrine  and  discipline,  bowing  their  neck  to  the 
yoke  of  Christ ;  and  as  members  in  common  of 
the  same  body,  to  lay  themselves  out  for  the  edi- 
fication of  their  brethren,  as  God  has  bestowed 
his  gifts  upon  them  respectively.  Moreover,  that 
these  things  may  be  the  better  observed,  it  is  the 
duty  of  all  believers  to  disjoin  themselves  from 
those  who  are  without  the  church,  and  to  join 
themselves  to  this  assembly  and  congregation  of  the 
faithful^  wherever  God  has  formed  it.  Whoever, 
therefore,  shall  forsake  that  true  church,  or  shall 
refuse  to  connect  themselves  ivith  it^^^  (in  whatever 
part  of  the  world  it  be,)  "  do  openly  resist  the  com- 
mandment of  God, 

"  We  believe  that  the  utmost  diligence  and 
prudence  are  to  be  used  in  determining,  accord- 
ing to  the  w^ord  of  God,  which  is  that  true 
church,  since  all  the  sects  upon  earth  lay  claim 
to  the  same  title.  We  do  not  now  speak  of  hy- 
pocrites who  are  mingled  with  good  men  in  the 
church,  although  they  do  not  properly  belong  to 


150 

her,  but  of  distinguishing  the  body  and  congrega- 
tion of  the  true  church  from  all  other  sects  which 
falsely  boast  of  being  members  thereof. 

''  By  the  following  marks,  therefore,  shall  the 
true  church  be  distinguished  from  the  false.  If 
there  flourish  there  the  pure  preaching  of  the  gos- 
pel^ and  the  legitimate  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments according  to  the  command  of  Christ.  If, 
moreover,  right  discipline  he  applied  for  the  coer- 
cion of  vice  ;  if,  in  fine,  to  sum  up  all  in  one  word, 
she  reduce  every  thing  to  the  rule  of  God^s  ivord, 
reject  all  things  contrary  thereunto ^  and  acknow- 
ledge Christ  to  he  her  only  head.  By  these  marks, 
we  say,  may  be  known  the  true  church,  from 
which  it  is  not  lawful  for  any  one  to  separate 
himself."* 


*  Credimus  et  confitemur  unicam  Ecclesiam  Catholicam,  seu  uni= 
•rersalem.  Q,uae  est  vera  congregatio  seu  ccetus  omnium  fidelium 
Christianomm,quitotam  suara  salutem  abuno  Jesu  Christo  expectant 
quatenus  videlicet  ipsius  sanguine  sunt  abluti,  et  per  Spiritum  ejus 
sanctificati  atque  obsignati.  Haec  porro  Ecclesia  ut  ab  initio  mundi 
fuit,  ita  et  usque  ad  ejus  finem  est  perduratura.  Id  vel  ex  eo  apparet, 
quod  Christus  rex  aeternus  est,  qui  nunquam  sine  subditis  esse  po- 
test- Caeterum  banc  Ecclesiam  deus  contra  omnem  mundi  furorem  et 
impetura  tuetur ;  quamvis  ad  aliquod  tempus  parva  admodum  et  quasi 
extincta  in  conspectu  horainum  appareat ;  quemadmodura  tempore  illo 
periculosissimo  Achabi  Deus  sibi  septem  raillia  virorum  reservasse  di- 
cttur,  qui  non  flexerantgenu  coram  Baal.  Denique  haec  Ecclesia  sancta 
nullo  est  aut  certo  loco  sita  et  circumscripta,  aut  uUis  certis  ac  singu- 
laribus  persomis  asitricta  aut  alligata.    S^d  per  omnem  orbem  terrarum 


151 

Some  of  these  expressions  are  very  strong:  and, 
to  one  not  acquainted  with  the  circumstances 
under  which  tliey  were  used,  may  look  as  if  they 
required  spotless  perfectmi  in  a  true  church  ;  or 
absohite  agreement  in  all  views  of  scriptural  in- 
stitutions. But  the  reader  must  not  permit  him- 
self to  be  carried  away  by  such  a  mistake  ;  no- 
thing could  be  further  from  the  intention  of  this 
"good  confession."  Its  object  is  to  show  the 
Protestant  church  to  be  a  true  church  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  church  of  Rome  ;  as  is  manifest  from 
the  sequel  of  this  very  article,  where  the  false 
church  is  described  as  "ahvays  attributing  more 
to  herself,  her  institutions,  and  traditions,  than  to 


sparsaatque  diffusa,  quamvig  animoac  voluntate  in  unoeDdemque  spi- 
I'itu,  virtute  fidei,  tota  sit  simiil  conjuncta  atque  unita. 

Crediinus  suinma  sum  diligentia,  tuin  prudentia,  ex  Dei  verbo  esse 
iriquireudum  ac  discernendum  quaenam  sit  ilia  vera  Ecclesia  :  quando- 
(luidem  omnes  sectae  quotquot  hodie  in  mundo  vigent  Ecclesia) 
titulum  nomenque  usurpant  atque  praetexunt.  Nequaquam  vero 
de  hypocrtamin  ccetu  nunc  loquimur,  qui  bonis  in  Ecclesia  sunt 
perniisti,  licet  ad  Ecclesiam  proprie  non  pertineant,  in  qua  corpora 
sunt  pi'ccsentes ;  sed  de  distinguendo  duntaxat  verse  Ecclesiae  corpora 
ac  congregatione,  ab  aliis  omnibus  sectis  qua?  se  Ecclesiae  membra 
esse  falso  gloriantur.  His  igitur  notis  vera  Ecclesia  falsa  discernetur. 
Si  ill  ilia  pura  Evangelii  praedicatio  legitimaque  Sacramentorum  ex 
Christi  prffiscripto  admiaistratio  vigeat;  si  item  recta  disci plina  Hc- 
clesiastica  utatur  ad  coercenda  vitia  ;  Si  denique  (ut  uno  verbo  cuncta 
complectamur.)  ad  normam  verbi  Dei  omnia  exigat  et  quaecunque 
iiuic  adversantur,  repudiet :  Christuraque  unicum  caput  agnoscat.  His, 
Inquam,  notis  certum  est  veram  Ecclesiam  dignosci  posse ;  a  qua  fa^ 
^isn  sit  quenquam  disjungi. 

20 


152 

the  word  of  God— as  not  subjecting  herselt*  to  the 
yoke  of  Christ — as  not  administering  the  sacra- 
ments according  to  his  prescription  ;  but  one 
while  adding  to  them,  and  another  diminishing 
from  them — as  always  relying  more  upon  men 
than  upon  Christ ;  and  as  persecuting  those  who 
aim  at  holy  conformity  to  his  law,  and  who 
arraign  her  avarice,  idolatry,  and  other  vices."* 

Such  phrases,  therefore,  as  "  the  pure  preach- 
ing of  the  gospel" — ■"  the  administration  of  the 
sacraments  according  to  the  command  of  Chrisf^ 
— "  the  right  use  of  discipline" — "  the  reducing 
every  thing  to  the  rule  of  God^s  ivord^^ — "  the  re- 
jection of  all  things  contrary  thereto,"  must  be  in- 
terpreted not  so  much  of  the  actual  attainment  of 
scriptural  perfection  by  any  churches  whatever, 
as  of  their  avow^ed  standard ;  the  test  to  which 
they  submit  their  pretensions  ;  and  of  their  sub- 
stantial character,  whatever,  in  other  respects, 
might  be  their  failings  or  differences.  That  this 
is  the  true  meaning,  the  following  considerations 
make  evident: 

(1.)  The  Belgic  churches  themselves  had  not 
then,  and  have  not  since,  arrived  at  such  purity 
as  their  own  confession,  according  to  certain  ex- 
jDressions  separately  taken,  seems  to  require.  And 

*  BEitiic  :  Confess,  art.  29.  zpudSynt.  Conf.  part  I.  p.  179. 


153 

they  surely  did  not  intend  to  say  that  they  had 
not  themselves  true  churches,  and  were  unworthy 
of  communion  with  others. 

(2.)  The  churches  adopting  this  confession, 
approved  the  confession  of  the  Swiss  churches, 
commonly  called  the  Helvetic  confession,  which, 
as  we  shall  presently  see,  disclaims  the  idea  of 
withdrawing  from  communion  with  the  churches 
of  Germany,  France,  England,  and  other  Chris- 
tian nations.*  Their  own  act,  therefore,  pro- 
claims their  communion  with  these  foreisin 
churches,  and  no  construction  may  be  put  upon 
their  words  which  shall  contradict  iheir  own 
practical  commentary. 

(3.)  This  same  Belgic  confession  was  unani- 
mously approved  by  the  continental  divines  at 
the  synod  of  Dordt,  A.D.  1619  ;  as  "  containing 
no  doctrine  adverse  to  ihe  declarations  of  holy 
scripture  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  as  agreeing  with 
the  truth,  and  with  the  confessions  of  the  other 
reformed  churches."t  It  cannot,  then,  be  fairly 
understood  in  a  sense  hostile  to  those  confessions  ; 
if  we  allow  the  delegates  from  almost  all  Protes- 
tant Christendom  to  have  known  any  thing  of 
the    faith   of   their  respective   churches  :    and 


*  Syntag.  Co>^FEss.part  I.  p.4. 

t  Acta  Synod.  Dordeechtan.t.,  Fess.  cxlvi.  p.  SOI.  Bcrd.  1620. 


154 

amons:  these  churches  there  was  th^,  as  there  is 
now,  great  diversity  in  many  things. 

The  Belgic  confession,  therefore,  waving  all 
minor  differences  between  Christians,  and  bent 
on  supporting  the  great  things  of  their  common 
faith,  contends  for  the  church's  unity  on  this  con- 
secrated ground ;  and  insists  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
every  one  who  loves  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  hold 
communion  with  her  through  the  medium  of  any 
one  of  her  branches  to  which  he  may  have  ac- 
cess in  any  part  of  the  world.  If  there  be  but 
a  true  church,  that  is  enough  to  justify  his  parti- 
cipation of  her  ordinances  ;  and  if  she  be  the  only 
true  church  there,  to  render  such  participatioa 
his  bounden  duty.  Thus  the  Belgic  confession, 
and,  of  course,  all  who  approved  it. 

As  for  rites,  ceremonies,  modifications  of  ex- 
ternal order,  he.  which  form  the  chief  differen- 
ces among  churches  who  hold  the  main  doctrines 
of  faith,  those  same  Christian  heroes,  of  whom 
thousands  and  ten  thousands  were  enrolled  in 
"  the  noble  army  of  martyrs,"  speak  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner : 

Augustan  confession.  "  If  doctrine  and  faith 
be  pure,  no  one,  on  account  of  dissimilitude  in 
human  traditions,  is  to  be  deemed  a  heretick,  or 
a  deserter  of  the  Catholick  church.  For  the  unity 
of  the  Catholick  church  consists  in  the  harmony 


loo 

of  doctrine  and  faith^  not  in  human  traditions^ 
ivhereof  there  has  always  been  in  the  churches 
throughout  the  whole  world  a  great  diversity J^"^"^ 

The  BoH(EMic  confession.  "  Although  the  ex- 
ternal face  and  form  of  our  churches  be  now  pe- 
culiar, yet  this  is  done  for  no  other  reason  than 
greater  convenience  in  teaching  the  word,  ad- 
ministering the  sacraments,  and  terminating  dis- 
putes among  brethren  who  may  consult  us.  As 
also  for  the  exercise  of  discipline,  by  excommu- 
nicating those  whose  conduct  merits  correction, 
and  who,  though  infamous  for  their  open  enormi- 
ties, refuse  to  repent ;  and  by  re-admitting  them, 
upon  repentance,  to  the  fellowship  of  the  church, 
and  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist.  We  are  not, 
therefore,  separated  from  the  Catholick  church, 
seeing  we  enjoy  all  those  things  which  properly 
appertain  to  her. 

"  As  to  the  differences  which  may  obtain 
among  the  churches  in  external  rites  or  ceremo- 
nies, we  think  it  of  no  importance  ;   for  these 


*  In  externis  traditionibus  abusus  quidara  mutati  sunt ;  quarum  eti- 
am  si  qua  estclissimilitudo,  si  tanien  doctrina,  et  fides  pura  sit,  nemo 
propter  iilam  traditionura  humanarura  dissimilitudiuem  habendus  est 
hagreticus,  aut  desertor  CatboliceeEcclesige.  Nam  unitas  Catholicse  Ec- 
clesiae  consistit  in  doctrinal  et  fidei  consensu  ;  non  in  traditionibus  hu- 
manis,  quarum  semper  in  Ecclesiis  per  totum  orbem  magna  fuit  dissi- 
militudo- 

AtTGusT.  GoNF.  Art.  XXI-> 


15t> 

greatly  vary  among  Christians  according  to  va- 
riety of  place  and  nation.  Ceremonies  change  ; 
but  faith,  Christ,  the  word,  change  not.  There- 
fore, a  variety  of  ceremonies,  if  they  be  not  re- 
pugnant to  the  word  of  God,  neither  does  harm  to 
Christianity,  nor  separates  from  the  church.  For 
true  rehgion  or  Christian  piety  does  not  consist  in 
external  rites  or  ceremonies,  but  in  spiritual  be- 
nefits :  in  righteousness,  faith,  joy,  peace,  and 
true  worship,  there  being  first  laid,  (as  sailh  Paul) 
the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Je- 
sus Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone, 
in  whom,  whatever  building  be  compacted,  it 
grovveth  unto  an  holy  temple  in  the  Lord."*  See 

*  Q.uanquain  autem  nunc  jiixta  externam  faciem,  et  modum  peculia- 
rem  habemus  congregationera  :  hoc  tamen  apud  nos  non  ob  aliud  fit, 
quani  ut  commodius  doceamus  verbuin,niinistremus  Sacranienta,  con- 
troversias  et  lites,  si  quando  inter  fratres  exoriantur,  etnos  consulant, 
(lirimamus,  et  ad  Ecclesiasticamdisciplinam  eiercendara  erga  eos  qui 
correctione  digna  committunt,  quique  manifestis  flagitiis  infames,  re- 
sipiscere  nolunt,  ut  excomniunicatione  ab  Ecclesiis  arceantur.  Ubi  ve- 
ro  resipuerunt,  rursuru  ad  consortium  Ecclesiae  et  Eucharistiee  sacra- 
mentum  admittantur.  Non  igitur  ab  Ecclesia  catliolica  segregamur, 
cum  earum  rerum  omnium,  quae  proprise  Ecclesiae  sunt,  usum  ha- 
beamus. 

Quantum  vero  attinet  ad  externos  ritus  aut  ceremonias,  sicubi  dissi- 
miles  in  Ecclesiis  sint,  nihil  referre  putamus ;  nam  apud  alios  aliae,  pro 
gentium  ac  locorum  varietate,  inter  Christianos  existunt.  Mutantur 
ceremoniae,  non  mutatur  fides,  Christus,  aut  verbum.  Non  ergo  aliae 
ceremoniae,  si  minus  pugnentverbo  Dei,  incommodant  Christianismo» 
nee  separant  ab  Ecclesia  :  Non  enim  hsec  religio  aut  Christiana  pietas 
in  ceremouiis  aut  ritibus  externis  sita  est,  sed  in  spiritalibus bonis,  jas- 


157 

also  the  whole  eighth  article  in  the  confession  it- 
self, "  concerning  the  holy  CathoUck  church^ 

The  Saxon  confession.  "  In  the  mean  time 
there  have  been,  and  are,  and  will  be,  in  the 
church  of  God,  men  holding  the  foundation,  who 
have  and  have  had,  and  will  have,  some  more 
some  less  light ;  and  sometimes  saints  too  build 
stubble  upon  the  foundation,  since,  especially  in 
the  wretchedness  of  the  present  times,  many  who 
have  the  beginnings  of  faith  have  not  the  privi- 
lege of  being  instructed,  and  of  conferring  with 
those  who  are  more  skilful.  These,  however, 
are  in  the  number  of  those  whom  it  is  the  will 
of  God  we  should  spare,  (Ezech.  9.)  who  groan 
and  grieve  on  account  of  established  errour.  A 
judgment,  therefore,  must  and  may  be  formed 
chiefly  from  the  voice  of  doctrine,  what  and 
where  is  the  true  church,  which,  by  the  voice  of 
true  doctrine,  and  the  legitimate  use  of  the  sa- 
craments, is  distinguished  from  all  other  human 
societies  ;  and  what  the  voice  of  true  doctrine  is, 
the  very  writings  of  the  apostles  and  prophets, 
and  the  creeds^  sufficiently  declare.  In  these  there 


titia,fide,  gaudio,  pace  et  vero  cultu,  jacto  fundamento  (ut  Paulus  alt) 
Apostolorum  et  Prophetarum,  sumrao  angulari  lapide  Christo  Jesu,  in 
quo  quacunque  structura  coagmentatur,  ea  crescit  in  teraplum  sanctum 
in  Domino— 

Cone.  Bohosm.  preef.  ajjud.  Syntag.  Conf. 

part  2.  p.  232, 


158 

iS  110  ambiguous  doctrine  concerning  the^bww-^a- 
iion^  viz.  concerning  tlie  articles  of  faith,  the  es- 
sence and  will  of  God,  the  redemption  of  the 
Son,  the  law,  the  j3romises,  the  use  of  the  sacra- 
ments, the  ministry" — * 

The  Helvetic  confession.  "  We  lay  so  great 
stress  upon  communion  with  the  true  church  of 
Christ,  as  to  deny  that  they  can  live  before  God, 
wiio  do  not  communicate  with  the  true  church  of 
God  but  separate  themselves  therefrom."t  The 
confession  then  protests  against  harsh  judgment 
and  {practices  on  account  of  individual  infirmi- 
ty, or  of  abuses  and  corruptions  in  particular 
churches  ;  and  adds,  "  It  is  to  be  observed,  that 


*  Interea  tamen  fuernnt,  sunt,  et  erunt  in  ecclesia  Dei  homines  reti- 
nentes  fundanjentura,  etiainsi  alii  plus  alii  minus  lucis  habuerunt,  ha- 
bent,  et  habebunt ;  et  interdum  sancti  etiara  stipulas  extruunt  suprs 
fundaraentum  :  cum  pra^scrtini  in  hac  temporum  miseria  multis  qui  ha- 
bent  initia  fidei  non  concedatur  ut  erudiri  et  cum  doctioribus  colloqui 
possint.  Hi  sunt  tamen  in  eorum  numero  quibus  Juliet  Deus  parci 
(Ezech.  9.)  Q,ui  gemunt  etdolent  propterea  quoderrores  stabiliantur. 
Preecipue  igitur  et  voce  doctr  nae  judicandum  est,  et  judicari  potest. 
quae  et  ubi  sit  vera  ecclesia  quae  voce  vera?  doctrinae,  deinde  et  legitime 
usu  sacramentorum  ab  aliis  gentibus  discernitur :  et  quse  sit  vox  vera' 
doctrinae  ostendunt  ipsa  scripta  prophetica  et  apostolica,  et  symbola. 
In  his  non  est  ambigua  doctrina  iiefundamento  ;  videlicet,  de  articulis 
fide;,  de  essentia  et  voluntate  Dei,  de  Filio  Redemptore^  de  lege,  de 
prom  ssionibus,  de  usu  sacramentorum,  de  ministerio. 

Saxon  :  Conf.  Art.  12.  Synt.  Conf.  part.  2.p.  98.  "* 

t  Communionem  vero  cum  Ecclesia  Chrlsti  vera  tanti  facimus,  ut 
negemus  eos  coram  Deo  vivere  posse  qui  cum  vera  Dei  ecclesia  non 
cpmmumcant,  sedab  ea  se  separant. 

Syntag  :  Conf.  p.  1.  p.  54.  art.  IT; 


159 

we  diligently  teach  in  what  the  truth  and  unity 
of  the  church  principally  consist ;  that  we  may 
not  rashly  excite  and  cherish  schisms  in  the 
church.  It  consists  not  in  ceremonies  and  external 
rites  J  but  rather  in  the  truth  and  unity  of  the  Catho- 
lick  faith.  The  CathoHck  faith  has  mq^beeii  deli- 
vered to  us  in  human  laws^  hut  in  the  divine  sciip- 
turcy  of  ivhich  the  apostles^  creed  is  a  compend. 
Whence  we  read  that  among  the  ancients  there 
was  great  diversity  of  rites  which  were  entirely 
free,  and  by  which  no  one  ever  imagined  the  uni- 
ty of  the  church  to  be  dissolved."* 

In  regard  to  rites  and  ceremonies,  the  twenty- 
seventh  article  remarks,  '^  That  if  discordant  rites 
are  found  in  the  churches,  let  no  one,  therefore, 
imagine,  that  the  churches  are  disunited.  -It  would 
be  impossible,'  says  Socrates,!  'to  detail  all  the 
rites  of  the  churches  in  different  countries.  No 
religious  sects  observe  the  same  rites,  although 


*  Observandura  pra^terea,  diligenter  docemusinquopotissimum  sit 
sita  Veritas  et  unitas  ecclesise,  ne  temere  schisniata  exciteraus  et  in  ec- 
clesia  foveamus.  Sita  est  ilia  non  in  caeremonlis  et  ritibus  externis, 
sed  magis  in  veritate  et  unitate  fidei  calholica?.  Fides  cathoiica  non 
est  nobis  tradita  Immanis  legibus,  sed  scriptura  divina  cujus  compendi- 
um est  Symbolura  Apostolicum.  Unde  legimus  apud  veteres  rituura 
fuisse  diversitatem  variara,  sed  earn  liberara,  qua  nemo  unquam  exist;- 
mavit  dissolvi  unitatem  ecclcsiasticam. 

lB.p.56.  Art.  IT. 

"r  The  ecclesiastical  historian. 

21 


160 

they  embrace  the  same  doctrine  concerning  them. 
For  they  who  are  of  the  same  faith  disagree  with 
each  other  about  their  rites.'  Thus  he.  And  we, 
at  this  day,  with  different  rites  through  our 
churches  in  celebrating  the  Lord's  supper,  and 
in  some  §ther  things,  do  nevertheless  preserve 
agreement  in  doctrine  and  faith;  nor  is  the  unity 
and  intercourse  of  our  churches,  by  that  differ- 
ence, torn  asunder.  The  churches  have  always 
used  their  hberty  in  such  rites,  as  being  indiffer- 
ent.    And  we  do  the  same  at  this  day."* 

And  lest  any  doubt  or  difficulty  should  remain 
on  this  subject,  the  subscribers  to  the  Helvetic 
confession  thus  express  themselves  in  their  pre- 
face : 

"  Impartial  readers  will  clearly  perceive  that  we 
have  no  communion  with  any  sects  or  heresies, 
which,  for  this  \ery  end,  we  mention  and  re- 
ject in  almost  every  chapter.     They  will,  there- 


*  Q.U0C1  si  in  ecclesiis  dispares  invenluntur  ritus,  nemo  ecclesias  ex- 
istimet  ex  eo  esse  dissidentea.  Socrates,  "  Impossible  fuerit,"  inquit, 
"omnes  ecclesiarum  quae  per  civitates  et  regiones  sunt  ritus  conscri- 
bere.  Nulla  religioeosdem  ritus  custodit,  etiamsi  eandem  de  illis  doc- 
trinam  aniplectatur.  Etenim  qui  ejusdem  sunt  fidei,  de  ritibus  inter 
se  dissentiunt."  Ha:'c  il!e.  Et  nos  hodie  ritus  diversos  in  celebratione 
caenae  Domini  et  in  ali's  nonnullis  rebus  habentes  in  nostris  ecclesiis, 
in  doctrina  tamen  et  fide  non  dissidemus,  neque  unitas  societas- 
que  ecclesiarum  nostrarum  ea  re  discinditur.  Semper  vero  ecclesiee  in 
hujusmodi  ritibus,  sicut  mediis,  usa-  sunt  libertate.  Id  quod  nos  ho- 
die quoque  facimus. 

iB.p.  82. 


161 

fore,  infer  also,  that  we  do  not,  by  any  7iefarious 
schism,  separate  and  rend  ourselves  from  the  holy 
churches  of  Christ,  in  Germany,  France,  England, 
and  other  Christian  nations :  but  that  we  thorough- 
ly agree  with  each  and  all  of  them  in  this  con- 
fession of  Christ's  truth,  and  embrace  thern  in 
unfeigned  love:  'and  although  there  be  discover- 
ed, in  different  churches,  a  certain  variety  of  ex- 
pression and  form  of  explaining  doctrine;  as  al- 
so of  rites  or  ceremonies  according  to  the  receiv- 
ed usage,  convenience  and  ediiication  of  parti- 
cular churches,  yet  they  will  notice,  that  these 
things  never  furnished,  in  any  period  of  the 
church,  ground  of  dissentions  and  schism.  The 
churches  of  Christ,  as  ecclesiastical  history 
shows,  have  always  used  their  liberty  in  this  mat- 
ter. For  pious  antiquity  that  mutual  agreement 
ill  the  principal  points  of  faith,  in  orthodox  under- 
standing, and  in  brotherly  love,  was  abundantly 
sufficient'."^  The  rest  of  the  preface  is  in  the 
same  strain. 

*  Ergo  manifestissime  ex  his  nostris  ajqui  deprehendcnt  lectores, 
nihil  nos  quocjue  habere  commuiiionis  cum  uliis  scciis  atijue  haeresibus 
quarum,  hoc  consilio,  in  singulis  jjrope  capitibus  luentionem  facimus, 
easque  rejicientes  perstringiiuus.  Coliigent  itaque  et  illud,  nos  a  Sanc- 
tis Christi  ecclesiis  Gcrmanix,  Gallia,  Anglia,  aliaruinque  in  orbe 
Christiano  nationum,  nefario  schismate  non  sejungere  atque  abrunipere: 
sed  cum  ipsis  omnibus  et  singulis,  in  hac  confessa  veritate  Christiana, 
probe    oonsenlire;  ipsasquecharitate  sincera  complecti. 

Tametsi  vero  in  dlversis  tcclcsiis  qua^km  ueprchcnditur  varietas  in 


162 

Let  us  briefly  sum  up  the  doctrine  of  these  ex- 
tracts from  the  confession  of  the  Swiss  churches. 
—They  contend, 

(1.)  For  Uberty  in  rites  and  ceremonies  of 
worship — 

(2.)  For  mutual  forbearance  in  the  article  of 
church  government — 

(3.)  For  latitude  in  the  forms  of  doctrinal  ex- 
pression, provided  the  substance  of  evangelical 
truth  be  preserved :  so  as  that  diversity  in  any  or 
all  of  these  things  shall  not  break  up  the  peace 
of  the  churches. — And 

(4.)  For  concord,  communion,  and  love  be- 
tween them,  upon  the  basis  of  their  unity  in  that 
faith  and  doctrine  to  which  they  all  look  for  their 
common  salvation. 

It  might,  however,  be  thought  that  these  sen- 
timents w^ere  peculiar  to  the  Swiss  churches ; 
and,  therefore,  not  a  fair  exhibition  of  the  pre- 
vailing principles  of  the  Reformation.  But  it  so 
happens,  that  this   confession  was  officially  ad- 

loquutionibus  et  modo  expositionis  doctrinpe,  in  ritibus  item  vel  cere- 

moniis,  eaque  recepta  pro  ecclesiarura  quarumlibet  ratione,  opportuni- 

tate,  et  cedificatione  ;  nunquara  tamen  ea,  ullis  in  Ecclesiae  teniporibus, 

raateriam  dissensionibus  et  schisraatibus  visa  est  suppeditare.     Semper 

enim  hacin  re  Christi  ecclesiae  usae  sunt  libertatc.    Id  quod  in  historia 

ecclesiastica  videre  licet.   Abunde  piae  vetustati  satis  erat,  mutuus  il- 

le  in  prcecipuis fidei  dogmatibus,  inque  seusu  orthodoxo  et  cliaritate  fra- 

terna,  consensus. 

Jb.  p.  12. 


163 

dressed,  in  the  preface  which  has  just  been  quoted, 
to  Christians  and  Christian  churches  throughout 
Europe ;  and  was  approved  by  the  churches  of 
England,  Scotland,  France,  the  United  Provinces, 
and  by  many  of  Poland,  Hungary,  and  Germa- 
ny.'^ Now,  in  these  churches,  there  was  a  very 
o*reat  variety  of  rehgious  observances,  as  well  as 
diiferences  of  a  higher  order.  Some  of  them,  as 
the  Dutch  and  Genevese,  were  Calvinists  in  doc- 
trine, and  Presbyterians  in  government :  others  as 
the  English,  were  Episcopal ;  and  others  again,  as 
the  German,  a  sort  of  medium  between  Episco- 
pacy and  Presbytery.  Here,  then,  we  have  the 
larger  part  of  Protestant  Christendom,  proclaim- 
ing with  one  mouth,  and  at  a  moment  when  the 
Spirit  of  God  and  of  glory  rested  conspicuously 
upon  them,  that  the  greatest  of  their  differen- 
ces, and  many  of  them  vv  ere  not  trifles,  were  not 
great  enough  to  interrupt  their  communion,  or 
diminish  their  love  :  but  were  all  to  be  absorbed 
in  the  importance,  all  to  disappear  in  the  light,  of 
that  grace  and  truth  which  made  them  one  in 
Christ  Jesus.     Nay,  that  were  they,  for  sucli 


»  Eandem  (confessioneni)  et  comprobarunt  ecclcFice  AngllaR,  Sco- 
tia, Galliae,  Eelgii  omnes:  Tolonicffi  qucque,  Hungaricae,  atone  Ger- 
-inanicxe  multse. 

Synt,  Cojsf.  part  l.r^  i. 


164 

causes,  to  separate  from  each  others'  fellow- 
ship, they  should  be  guilty  of  a  nefarious 
scKFSM.  And  none  of  them  were  more  free, 
cheerful,  and  decided,  in  asserting  the  obligation 
of  this  catholick  communion,  than  the  Calvi- 
nisiic  Presbyterians ! 

Such  a  concurrence  of  public  opinion  and 
feehng,  was  nothing  more  than  a  concentration 
of  that  private  opinion  and  feeling  which  then 
pervaded  the  church  of  God.  The  time  had  not 
come  when  orthodox  creeds  were  a  party  inheri- 
tance. It  was  reserved  for  after  ages  to  cherish  a 
hereditary  veneration  for  confessions  of  faith  at 
variance,  in  material  points,  with  the  actual  state 
of  principle  in  the  churches  which  receive  them. 
The  spectacle,  now  so  familiar,  was  not  yet  ex- 
hibited, of  contention  for  every  thing  in  a  confes- 
sion  as  for  a  consecrated  trust ;  and  of  violent  op- 
position  to  maiiy  of  those  very  same  things  in  prac- 
tical life — the  curious  and  humiliating  specta- 
cle of  tender  affection  displayed  toward  it  as  a 
"  dead  letter,"  and  of  unremitting  hostility  to 
those  who  would  bring  it  forth  in  its  energy  as 
"  a  quickening  spirit." 

It  may  not  be  improper  to  give  an  exauiple  or 
two,  for  the  sake  of  readers  who  have  not  access 
to  the  original  sources  of  information.  Luther, 
in  a  p»reface  from  his   own  pen  to  the  Bohmmic 


165 

confession,  which,  it  will  be  remembered,  com- 
prehends the  faith  of  the  Waldenses,  has  the 
foilcwing  remarks  concerning  the  churches  of 
the  Keforriistion : 

"  We  ought  to  give  the  greatest  possible  thanks 
to  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
who,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  glory,  hath 
commanded  to  shine  out  of  darkness  this  hght 
of  his  Yvoid,  by  which  he  would  again  destroy 
death,  and  illumine  life  among  us :  and  to  con- 
gratulate both  them/'  {the  Waldenses^)  "  and  our- 
selves, that  we,  who  were  far  apart,  are  now,  by 
the  destruction  of  the  parting-vjall  of  suspicion^ 
rvherehy  ive  seemed  heretics  to  each  other^  brought 
near  together,  and  gathered  into  one  fold  under 
that  one  shepherd  and  bishop  of  our  souls,  who 
is  blessed  forever,  amen ! 

'^  But  if  certain  diiTerences"  from  other  church- 
es, "  occur  in  this  confession  of  theirs  concern- 
ing rites  and  ceremonies,  or  celibacy,  let  us  re- 
member, that  all  the  rites  and  observances  of  all 
the  churches  never  were,  nor  could  be,  the  same. 
Such  an  agreement  is  not  permitted  by  the  va- 
rious circumstances  of  time,  place,  and  men  ; 
only  let  the  doctrine  o(  faith  and  morals  be  pre- 
served. For  this  ouerht  to  be  the  same  as  Paul 
frequently  admonishes ;  '  Speak  all  the  same  tiling^ 
saith  he.  Again,  '  That  with  one  7iu)uth  you  may 
glorify  the  God  and  Father  qf  our  Lord  Jesus 


166 

Christ^  For  that  marriage  should  be  among 
them,"  the  Waldensea,  '^  as  it  is  among  us,  their 
state  and  condition  does  not  allow.  In  the  mean- 
time, it  is  sufficient,  that  what  is  lawful  to  all,  is 
not  taught  to  be  sin  to  any,  and  is  believed,  with- 
out injury  to  individual  faith  and  conscience."^' 
In  a  letter,  1535,  to  these  same  brethren  of 
the  Waldenses  in  Bohemia,  Melancthon  thus 
writes : 


*  Seti  Hunc  prodeuiit  non  paulo  cultiores  et  liberiores,  ne  dicam  eti- 
ani,  illustEiores  et  nieliores  ut  sperem  non  ingratos  neque  inamabiles 
tore  omnibus  vcre  Christianis,  ita,  ut  sperem  et  gratias  nos  agere  opor- 
teatquatn  maximasDeo  etPatri  D.  N.  JesuChristi,  qui  secundum  divi- 
tias  glorise  sua?  jussit  e  tenebris  splendescere  lumen  hoc  verbi  sui,  quo 
ilenuo  in  nobis  destrueret  mortem  et  illuminaret  vitam:  et  gratulari  turn 
i'.lis,  turn  nobis,  quod  qui  inter  nos  ipsos  quoque  longe  fuimus,  destruc- 
lo  nunc  interstitio  suspicionis,  quo  nobis  mutuo  heeretici  videbatnur, 
i'aeti  sumus  prope,  et  reducti  simul  sumus  in  unum  ovile  subunum  il- 
ium Pastorem  et  Episcopum  animarum  nostrarum,  qui  est  benedictus 
in  secula.     Amen. 

€tuod  si  quce  differentiie  in  hac  eorum  Confessionc  occurrent  de  rl- 
tibus  et  ceremoniis,  vel  de  cselibatu,  memineriraus  nunquam  fuisse,  ne- 
que potuisse  omnium  Ecclesiarum  omnes  ritus  et  observationes  esse 
«:quales  vel  easdeni.  Id  enim  non  permittunthorainum,  regionum,  tera- 
porum  rationes  et  varietates,  modo  salva  sit  doctrina  fidei  et  mbrum. 
Tla^c  enira  debet  esse  eadera,  ut  Paulus  saepe  monet.  Idem  dicatis 
/-inquit)  omnes.  Rursus,  Ut  uno  ore  honorificetis  Deum  et  Patrem 
Domini  Nostri  Jesu  Christi.  Nam  ut  conjugium  sit  apud  eos  eo 
modo  liberum,  ut  apud  nos,  non  sinit  eorum  status  et  conditio:  Inte- 
rim satis  est,  quod  cuilibet  licitum,  et  nulli  peccatum  esse  docetur,  et  cre- 
ditur  salva  unius  cujusque  fide  et  conscientia.  Commendo  igitur  in  Do- 
mino omnibus  piis  et  banc  Confessionem  Fratrum,  in  qua  videbunt 
Clare  quanta  injuri|^  hactenus  a  Papistis  fuerint  damnati  et  vexati. 
Frcpf.  adConf.  BoJmm,  Stkt.  payt  2.  p.  ST9. 


1G7 

"  Since  we  agree  in  the  principal  articles  ot 
Christian  doctrine,  let  us  embrace  each  other 
with  mutual  love.  Nor  ought  dissimilitude  and 
variety  of  rites  and  ceremonies  to  sever  our  af- 
fections. Paul  often  discourses  concerning  ce- 
remonies, and  forbids  Christians  to  fall  out  on 
account  of  their  variety,  although  the  ivorld  fight 
furiously  about  them.* 

'•  As  to  my  own  feelings  toward  you,  be  as- 
sured, that  I  most  earnestly  wish  that  those  who 
love  the  gospel,  and  desire  to  glorify  the  name 
of  Christ,  would  cultivate  mutual  love  to  each 
other;  and  so,  by  their  common  endeavours, 
make  their  doctrine  redound  to  the  glory  of 
Christ,  that  they  may  not  destroy  themselves  by 
domestick  feuds  and  discords,  especially  on  ac- 
count of  things  for  which  it  is  not  necessary  to 
excite  disturbance." 

By  "  things  for  which  Christians  ought  not  to 
raise  disturbance,"  Melancthon  evidently  under- 
stands  all  things  which  belong  not  to  the  "  prin 
cipal  articles  of  Christian  doctrine." 


*  "  Cum  de  praecipuis  articulis  Doctrinae  Christianae  inter  nos  con- 
.?tet,  complectamur  nos  rautuo  araore.  Neque  dissimilitudo  et  varietas 
ritruni  et  cseremoniarum  disjungere  debet  mentes  nostras.  Soepe  Pau- 
lus  concionatur  de  caeremoniis,  et  prohibet  Christianos  dissidere  prop- 
ter varietatem  ritum  et  csereraoniarura,  quainvis  mundus  propter  cie- 
rcinonias  vohementer  pugnet. 

lU.  p.280, 

22 


168 

But  among  all  the  reformers,  no  one  stands 
forth  a  more  conspicuous  advocate  for  Catholick 
communion  than  John  Calvin.* 

His  Institutes  of  the  Christian  religion^  first  pub- 
lished in  1536,  and  dedicated  to  Francis  the  I. 
of  France,  are  a  professed  commentary  upon 
that  little  doctrinal  abstract,  called  "  the  apostles' 
creed."  On  the  article  concerning  the  "  Holy 
Catholick  churchy  and  the  communion  of  saints,''^ 
which  forms  the  basis  of  his  fourth  book,  he  dis- 
cusses, at  length,  in  his  first  chapter,  this  whole 
subject  of  church-communion.  He  refutes  the 
arguments  which  are  used  at  this  hour,  for  sepa- 
rate communions — And  he  maintains,  with  that 
point  and  decision  which  so  eminently  characte- 
rize his  pen,  that  it  is  not  lawful,  but  most  unlaw- 
ful— subversive  of  Ciiiistlan  unity,  and  an'^ffront 


*  The  Paul  of  the  Reformation.  Had  any  thing  been  wanting  in 
iiis  own  writings,  in  the  opinion  of  his  contemporaries,  in  his  influence 
tvith  the  political  and  ecclesiastical  cabinets  of  Protestant  Europe, 
and  in  the  dread  and  terrour  of  the  Papists  ;  to  evince  the  greatness 
of  this  extraordinary  man,  it  M'ould  have  been  supplied  by  tlie  ranco- 
rous malignity  which  assailed  him  during  his  life  ;  and  which  has  been 
hardly,  if  at  all,  abated  by  his  death.  His  very  name  seems  at  this  day 
to  blister  the  tribes  of  errour  in  all  its  gradations  ;  and  to  form  a  so- 
litary exception  to  the  reverence  which  the  world  entertains  for  de- 
parted genius.  More  than  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  have  elapsed 
since  he  went  to  join  the  apostle  whom  he  so  much  resembled,  in  the 
kingdom  of  God  ;  and  there  is  hardly  an  enemy  to  the  truth,  of  what- 
ever size,  who  does  not  think  it  incumbent  on  him  to  derivp  Impoi'- 
tar?ce  from  *'  a pi'.-^.''  at  the  memorv  of  C  i t.vi \. 


169 

to  the  majesty  in  the  heavens,  to  withdraw,  upon 
any  pretext  whatever,  from  communion  with 
other  churches  which  are  sound  in  the  substan- 
tial faith. 

Nothing  could  more  ornament  this  work  than 
the  insertion  of  his  entire  chapter.  But  as  it 
would  extend  to  at  least  fifty  pages,  which  would 
far  exceed  the  limits  of  quotation  ;  and  as  it  is, 
like  the  most  of  his  writings,  too  dense  for 
abridgement,  the  reader  must  put  up  with  a  pas- 
sage or  two,  merely  as  a  specimen,  and  be  refer- 
red to  the  chapter  itself  for  more  full  satisfaction. 

"Where  the  preached  gospel  is  reverently 
heard,  and  the  sacraments  are  not  neglected, 
there,  during  such  time,  there  is  no  deceitful  nor 
ambiguous  appearance  of  a  church,  of  which  no 
man  is  permitted  to  despise  the  authority,  to  dis- 
regard the  admonitions,  to  resist  the  advices,  or 
to  mock  the  chastisements :  much  less  to  revolt 
from  her,  and  to  break  her  unity.  For  the  Lord 
lays  so  much  stress  upon  communion  with  his 
church,  as  to  account  that  man  a  fugitive  and 
a  deserter  from  religion,  who  shall  contumacious- 
ly alienate  himself  from  any  Christian  society 
which  only  cherishes  the  true  ministry  of  the  word 
and  sacraments.  He  so  recommends  her  authori- 
ty, as  to  reckon  the  violation  thereof  a  diminu- 
tion of  his  own,"  which  1  Tim.  3,  15.  Eph.  L 


no 

23.  5.  27.  arc  produced  to  prove.  Calvin  llieu 
proceeds,  "  A\  hence  it  follows,  that  a  departure 
from  the  church  is  a  denial  of  God  and  of  Christ. 
Wherefore,  we  ought  to  be  the  more  on  our  guard 
asrainst  so  Avicked  a  dissention.  Because,  while 
we  endeavour,  as  much  as  in  us  lies,  to  effect  the 
ruin  of  God's  truth,  we  deserve  to  be  crushed  by 
the  lightnings  of  his  wrath.  A  more  atrocious 
crime  cannot  be  imagined,  than  to  violate,  with 
sacrilegious  perfidy,  the  conjugal  union  which  the 
only  begotten  Son  of  God  has  deigned  to  con- 
tract with  us,"^ 

Again.     "  Our  assertion,  that  the  pure  minis- 
try of  the  word  and  the  pure  celebration  of  the 


*  Ubi  i-'evci-entcr  aiulitur  Evangelii  praidicatio,  neque  Saci-amcntu 
negliguntur,  illic  proeo  tempore  neque  fallax  neque  ambigua  Eccle- 
?ie  npparct  facies:  cujus  vel  auctoritateni  spernere,  vel  nionita  res- 
puerc,  vel  gonsiliis  rcfragai'i,  vel  castigationes  ludere,  neiiiini  inipune 
Hcol :  niuito  minus  ab  ea  ileficere,  ac  ejus  abrumpereunitatem.  Tanti 
••nim  Ecclesi*  suic  communionem  facit  Domiiius,  ut  pro  transfuga  et 
(lesertore  religionis  habeat,  quicutique  se  a  qualibet  Christiana  socie- 
tate,  quoj  modo  \-erum  verbi  ac  sacramentorum  miuisteriura  colat,  con- 
nauaciter  alienarlt.  Sic  ejus  auctoritatemconmiendat,  ut  dum  ilia  vio- 

latur,  suam  ipsius  imminutam  ccnscat. — Unde  sequitur,  discessio- 

iiem  ab  Ecclesia,  Dei  et  Christi  abnegationem  esse:  quo  magis  a 
1am  scelerato  dissidio  cavendum  est :  quia  dum  veritalis  Dei  ruinam, 
quantum  in  nobis  est,  molimur,  digni  suraus  ad  quos  conterendos  toto 
ii'iie  sua}  impetu  fulminet.  Necullnm  atrocius  fingi  crimen  potest,  quam 
!,;acrilega  pcrfidia  violare  conjugium  quod  nobiscum  unigcnitus  Dei  iili- 

C.vi^TiNi,  I/i5?.Lib.  IV.  C.  1.  k  10. 


171 

sacraments,  is  a  sufficient  pledge  and  earnest  ot" 
our  safety  in  embracing,  as  a  church,  the  society 
in  which  they  shall  both  be  found,  goes  so  far  as 
this,  that  she  is  never  to  be  renounced  so  long  as 
she  shall  persevere  in  them,  although^  in  oilier  re- 
spects ^  she  may  ahoundin  faults.  Even  in  the  admi- 
nistration of  doctrine  or  sacraments,  some  defect 
may  possibly  creep  in  ;  which  yet  ought  not  to 
alienate  us  from  her  communion.  For  all  the 
heads  of  true  doctrine  are  not  of  the  same  rank. 
Some  are  so  necessary  to  be  known,  that  they 
must  be  fixed  and  undisputed  by  all,  as  the  cha- 
racteristic points  of  religion.  Such  as,  that  '  there 
is  one  God' — that  '  Christ  is  God,  and  the  Son  of 
God' — that  '  our  salvation  depends  upon  the 
mercy  of  God,'  and  the  like.  There  are  others 
which,  ahhough  subjects  of  controversy  among 
the  churches,  do  not  destroy  the  unity  of  the 
faith.  If,  for  example,  one  church,  without  the 
lust  of  contention,  or  obstinacy  in  asserting  its 
own  opinion,  should  think  that  the  souls  of  be- 
lievers departing  from  the  body  speed  their  flight 
immediately  to  heaven:  another,  not  daring  to 
determine  any  thing  about  their  place^  holds  it 
nevertheless  for  certain  that  they  live  to  the  Lord. 
— What  two  churches  should  fall  out  on  such  a 
matter  as  this  ?  When  Paul  says,  '  Let  us^  as 
many  as  are  perfect^  he  of  one  mind:  if  in  miy 


172 

thing  ye  arc  of  different  mind^  the  Lord  shall  reveal 
this  also  to  you  ;'^  does  he  not  sufficiently  indi- 
cate, that  disagreement  in  things  not  so  very  ne- 
cessary, ought  not  to  be  a  source  of  division 
among  Christians  ?  To  agree  throughout  is,  in- 
deed, our  first  attainment :  but  since  no  man  is 
perfectly  free  from  the  clouds  of  ignorance,  we 
either  shall  leave  no  church  at  all,  or  we  must 
forgive  mistakes  in  those  things  where  ignorance 
may  prevail  without  violating  the  substance  of 
religion,  or  hazarding  the  loss  of  salvation.  ! 
would  not  here  be  understood  to  patronize  even 
the  minutest  errours,  nor  to  express  an  opinion 
that  they  ought  to  be  cherished,  in  the  shghtest 
degree,  by  flattery  or  connivance.  But  I  say  that 
we  may  not,  on  account  of  smaller  disagree- 
ments, rashly  forsake  any  church  wherein  is  pre- 
served sound  and  unhurt,  that  doctrine  which 
forms  the  safeguard  of  piety,  and  that  use  of  the 
sacraments  instituted  by  the  Lord."t 


*  Piiii.  III.  15. 

t  Quod  dicimns  purum  verbi  ministeriura  etpurum  in  celebrandis  sa- 
cranientis  rituiii,  idoneum  esse  pignus  et  arrhabonem,  ut  tuto  possimus 
societatem  in  qua  utrunique  extiterit,  pro  Ecclesia  araplexari,  usque  eo 
valet  ut  nusqnara  abjicienda  sit  quanidiu  in  illis  perstiterit,  etiarasi  ujul- 
tis  alioqui  vitiis  scateat.  Q.uin  etiam  potest  vel  in  doctrinse,  vel  in  sa- 
vT?.npntornm  adminlgtratione  vitii  q^uidpiam  obrpp(*r<».  qnod  alionare 


173 

''  In  bearing  with  imperfections  of  life,  our  in- 
dulgence must  proceed  much  further.  For  we 
are  here  on  very  shppery  ground,  and  Satan  lies 
in  wait  for  us  with  no  ordinary  machinations. 
There  always  have  been  some  who,  imbued  with 
a  false  persuasion  of  their  absolute  sanctity,  as  if 
they  had  become  a  sort  of  supernatural  beings, 
disdained  the  society  of  all  men  in  whom  they 
perceived  the  remains  of  human  infirmity.  Such, 


nos  ab  ejus  communione  non  debeat.  Non  enim  unius  sunt  formse  om- 
nia verse  doctrinse  capita.  Sunt  quadara  ita  necessaria  cognitu,  ut  fixa 
esse  et  indubitata  omnibus  oporteat,  ceu  propria  religionis  placita: 
qualia  sunt,  Unum  esse  Deum.  Christum  Deum  esse,  ac  Dei  Filium  : 
In  Dei  misericordia  salutem  nobis  consistere  :  et  similia.  Sunt  alia, 
quje  inter  Ecclesias  controversa,  fidei  tamen  unitatem  non  dirimant, 
au^  enim  ob  hoc  unura  Ecclesiae  dissideant,  si  altera  citra  contentio- 
nis  libidinem,  citra  pervicaciam  asserendi,  animas  k  corporibus  demi- 
-rantes  in  ccelum  convolare  putet ;  altera  nihil  ausit  definire  de  loco, 
Lteruui  vivere  tamen  Domino  certostatuat?  Verba  sunt  apostoli, 
Quicuiique  perfedi  sumus,  idem  sentimnus  :  siquid  alHer  sapltis,  hoc  quo- 
que  vobis  Dominus  revelabit.  Annon  satis  indicat,  dissensionem  de  re- 
bus istis  non  ita  necessariis,  dissidii  materiam  esse  non  debere  inter 
Christianos  ?  Primdm  quidem  est,  ut  per  omnia  consentiamus  :  sed 
quoniam  nemo  est  qui  non  aliqua  ignorantiae  nubecula  obvolutus  sit: 
autnuUam  relinquamus  Ecclesiam  oportet,  authallucinationemcondo- 
nemus  in  lis  rebus  quae  et  inviolata  religionis  summa  et  citra  salutis 
jacturam  ignorari  possint  Hie  autem  patrocinari  erroribus  vel  minu- 
tissimis  nolim,  ut  blandiendo  et  connivendo  censeam  fovendos :  sed 
dico  non  temere  ob  quaslibet  dissentiunculas  deserendara  nobis  Eccle- 
siam, in  qua  duntaxat  ea  salva  et  illibata  doctrina  retineatur  qua  con- 
stat incolumitas  pietatis,  et  Saeramentorum  usus  a  Domino  institutus 
custodiatur. 

Id.  ibid,  n^' 


174 

ill  old  time,  were  the  Caihari^  and  (who  came 
very  near  their  madness)  the  Donatists,  Such, 
at  this  day,  are  some  of  the  Anabaptists^  who 
would  fain  appear  to  have  made  greater  profici- 
ency than  their  neighbours.  There  are  others 
who  go  wrong  more  from  an  inconsiderate  zeal 
for  righteousness,  than  from  such  senseless  pride. 
For  when  they  see,  that  the  fruits  of  practical  life 
among  those  who  enjoy  the  gospel,  do  not  cor- 
respond with  its  doctrine,  they  immediately 
judge  that  no  church  is  there.  The  offence  is  in- 
deed very  just ;  and  we,  in  this  most  wretched 
age,  give  but  too  much  occasion  for  it :  nor  can 
we  excuse  our  cursed  sloth,  which  the  Lord  will 
not  permit  to  go  unpunished ;  as  he  has  already 
begun  to  chasten  it  with  heavy  stripes.  (Wo, 
therefore,  to  us  who,  by  our  enormities,  wound 
the  weak  conscience  !)  But,  on  the  other  hand^ 
they  whom  J  have  mentioned,  sin  in  their  turn, 
by  not  knowing  how  to  set  limits  to  their  offence. 
For  where  the  Lord  requires  clemency,  they, 
without  regarding  it,  abandon  themselves  to  im- 
moderate severity.  For  because  they  do  not  think 
the  church  is  where  there  is  not  solid  purity  and 
integrity  of  life,  through  their  very  hatred  of 
crimes  they  quil  the  lawful  church  under  the 


175 

fdesL  of  shunning  the  faction  of  the  ungodly.^'* 
*  *  4t  ^t  *  ^t 
"  I  do  not  deny  that  it  is  the  duty  of  a  pious 
man  to  withdraw  from  all  private  intimacy  with 
the  wicked  ;  to  entangle  himself  with  them  by 
no  voluntary  bonds.  But  it  is  one  thing  to  avoid 
famiharity  with  bad  men ;  another,  out  of  dislike 
for  them,  to  renounce  communion  with  the 
church.  As  to  their  deeming  it  sacrilege  to  par- 
ticipate with  such  in  the  bread  of  the  Lord,  they 


*  In  vitae  autem  iraperfectione  tolerandamulto  longius  procedere  in- 
dulgentia  nostra  debet :  hie  enim  valde  lubricus  est  lapsus :  neque  vul- 
garibus  machinanientis  hie  Satan  nobis  insidiatur,  Fuerunt  enim  sem- 
per qui  falsa  absolutae  sanctimoniae  persuasione  imbuti,  tanquam  aerii 
quidam  dsemones  jam  facti  essent,  omnium  hominum  consortium  asper- 
narentur,  in  quibus  humanum  adhuc  aliquid  subesse  cernerent.  Tales 
dim  erant  Cathari,  et  (qui  ad  eorum  vesaniam  accedebant)  Donatistsp. 
Tales  hodie  sunt  ex  Anabaptistis  nonnulli,  qui  supra  alios  volunt  vi- 
Jeri  profecisse.  Alii  sunt  qui  inconsiderato  magis  justitise  zelo  quam 
insana  ilia  superbia  peccant.  Dum  enim  apud  eos  quibus  Evangelium 
annunciatur,  ejus  doctrinse  non  responderevitse  fructum  vident,  nullam 
illic  esse  Ecclesiam  statim  judicant.  Justissima  quidem  est  oifensio,  et 
cui  plus  satis  occasionis  hoc  miserrimo  seculo  preebenius :  nee  excusare 
licet  maledictam  nostram  ignaviam,  quam  Dominus  impunitam  non  si- 
net  :  ut  jam  gravibus  flageliis  castigare  incipit.  (Vae  ergo  nobis,  qui 
tam  dissoluta  flagitiorum  licentia  committimus  ut  propter  nos  vulne- 
rentur  imbecilles  conscientiae  I)  Sed  in  hoc  vicissim  peccant  illi  quos 
diximus,  quod  offensioni  suae  modura  statuere  nesciunt.  Nam  ubi  Do- 
minus clementiam  exigit,  omissa  ilia,  totos  se  immoderatae  severitati 
tradunt.  Q,uiaenim  non  putant  esse  Ecclesiam  ubi  non  est  solida  vitse 
puritas  etintegritas,  scelerum  odio  a  legitima  Ecclesia  discedunt,  duna 
1  factione  improborum  declinare  se  putant. 

Ibid.  }  iS. 

23 


176 
are  iiiacli  more  rigid  in  that  particular  tliaii  PauL 

^  *  *  *  *  •» 
"  But  although  this  temptation  sometimes  be- 
sets good  men  through  an  inconsiderate  zeal  for 
righteousness,  yet  we  shall  find,  that  too  great 
moroseness  springs  more  from  pride  and  haughti- 
ness, and  a  false  opinion  of  one's  own  sanctity, 
than  from  true  holiness,  and  the  true  study  of  it. 
So  that  they  who  are  most  daring  and  forw-ard  in 
promoting  defection  from  a  church,  have,  for  the 
most  part,  no  other  inducement  than  to  display 
their  superiour  goodness  by  their  contempt  of 
every  one  else."t 

Thus  Calvin. — But  before  we  leave  him,  it 
will  be  proper  to  notice  two  or  three  things  which 
may  be  supposed  to  diminish  the  value  of  his 


.  *  Non  equidem  nego  qiiUi  pii  hoiiiini&sit  ab  oiuni  privataimproborum 

consuetuditie  se  subducere,  nulla  se  voluntaria  ciimipsls  necessitudine 

implicare  :  sed  aliudest  lualoram  fugere  contubernium  ;  aliud,  ipsorum 

odio,  Ecclesiae  commuuionem  reiiunciare.  Gluod  aiitein  sacrilegiuni  esse 

putantparticipare  cum  illis  paiiein  Domini,  in  eo  rigidiores  niulto  sunt 

quam  Paul  us. 

Ibid,  i  15. 

t  Qiuanquam  autera  ex  iiiconsidcrato  justitiie  zelo  hac  tentatio  bo- 
nis etiam  iuterdum  oboritur  :  hoc  tamen  reperienuis,  nimiam  morobita- 
tein  ex  superbia  uiagis  et  fastu  falsaque  sanctitatis  opinione,  quain  ex 
vera  sanctitatc  veroque  ejus  studio  nasci.  Itaque  qui  aJ  faciendam  ab 
Ecclesia  defectioueni  suntaliis  audaciores,  et  quasi  anteslgnani,  ii  ut 
plurimuni  nihil  aliud  causae  habent  nisi  ut  omnium  contemptux)stcnteni 
se  aliis  esse  meliorcs- 

iBin.  J  16. 


177 

teslimonv.  For  it  may  be  said,  that  his  "  Insti- 
tutes," being  the  work  of  a  very  young  man,* 
want  that  stamp  and  seal  of  authority  which  are 
impressed  by  mature  age — that  they  contain  the 
views  and  feelings  of  an  individual,  who,  how- 
ever distinguished,  was  still  but  one — -and  that 
his  strictures  relate  to  the  communion  of  a  Chris- 
tian with  his  own  church,  and  not  to  his  commu- 
nion with  other  churches,  or  to  their  intercommu- 
nion between  themselves. 

The  first  of  these  objections  might  be  dis- 
posed of  promptly.  No  competent  judge,  who 
has  read  the  "  Institutes,"  and  has  not  sold  him- 
self to  prejudice  or  faction,  would  willingly  en- 
danger the  credit  of  his  own  understanding  at 
fifty^  by  questioning  the  intellectual  maturity  of 
Calvin  at  twenty-four.  The  objection,  however, 
has  no  place.  Subsequent  reflection,  observation, 
and  experience,  served  only  to  confirm  his  earlier 
judgment.  In  a  letter  to  his  friend  Farkll, 
three  vears  afterwards,  he  has  the  foiiowine:  ex- 
pressions  :  "I  only  insisted  upon  this,  that  they," 
the  pious,  "should  not schismatically  rend  asunder 
any  church;  which,  although  extremely  corrupt 
in  morals,  and  even  infected  with  strange  doc- 


*  They  Avere  written  before  he  had  completed  the  tvventy-fifih  year 
of  his  age-  He  was  born  in  July,  1509,  and  this  dedication  toFRAKcis 
the  I.  bears  the  date  of  .Aiiiriif^t.  l^SG.  But  a  pr(V>n  s  edition  lia<i  been 
published  in  1335. 


178 

trines,  had  not  entirely  revolted  from  that  doc- 
trine in  which  Paul  teaches  that  the  church  of 
Christ  is  founded."* 

To  return  to  the  "  Institutes."  It  is  plain,  from 
their  history,  that  they  bear  the  richest  and  ripest 
fruits  which  the  mind  of  their  authour  had  culti- 
vated. Upon  none  of  his  productions  did  he  be- 
stow so  much  pains  and  labour  as  upon  this.  It 
is  in  reahty  his  chef-cPceuvre  ;  and  so  he  himself 
considered  it.  He  was,  therefore,  continually  re- 
vising and  retouching  it,  as  it  ran  through  various 
editions,  for  the  space  of  twenty-three  years  ; 
and  it  received  its  finishing  from  his  elegant  pen 
in  1559,  when  he  was  fifty  years  old,  only  five 
years  before  his  death.f 

That  he  was  but  one  is  true  ;  yet  a  truth  of  no 
importance  to  the  argument ;  unless  it  could  be 
demonstrated  that  he  stood  alone.  How  diiTer- 
ent  the  fact  was,  the  preceding  pages  have  al- 
ready proved.  And  this  very  work,  as  published 
in  French  and  Latin,  was  drawn  up  in  behalf  of 
the  French  churches,  to  show  what  sort  of  doc- 


*  Hoc  unum  contendebam,  ne  schisraate  scinderent  qualemcumque 
ecclesiam  :  quae,  utcunque  esset  corruptissima  moribus,  doctrinis  etiam 
cxoticis  infecta,  non  tameri  desciveritpenitus  ab  eadoctrina  qua  eccle- 
eiam  Christi  fundari  docet  Paulus. 

Calv.  Epist.  Opp.  T.  IX.  p.  6. 

t  See  his  epistle  to  the  reader,  prefixed  to  the  "  Institutes,"  under 
iateof  1st  of  August,  1559.   Opp.  T.  IX.  Amst  1667.  Fol. 


179 

trine  they  beMeved  and  taught ;  so  that  it  is,  in 
some  measure,  a  work  of  public  authority  ;  and 
it  obtained  the  unbounded  applause  and  appro- 
bation of  both  the  learned  and  rehgious  world. 
Even  the  fastidious  Scaliger,  who  seldom  prais- 
ed any  body  but  himself,  or  any  thing  but  his 
own,  was  among  its  admirers  and  eulogists.  It 
was  translated  into  Italian,  German,  Flemish, 
Spanish  and  English  :  and  so  often  republished 
in  the  original  Latin,  that  Mons.  Masson,  by  a 
strong  hyperbole,  says,  it  was  printed  "  a  thoU'» 
sand  times'."*  Calvin  himself  informs  us,  that 
it  met  with  the  most  encouraging  reception 
from  the  Christian  publick — "  with  such  favour 
from  almost  all  the  pious, ^^  they  are  his  own  words, 
"as  he  had  not  dared  even  to  wish,  far  less  to 
expect."t  It  appears,  then,  that  his  views  of 
communion  were  the  views  of  reformed  Europe, 
or  the  work  which  contains  them  would  never 
have  been  so  popular  in  the  churches. 

The  idea  that  the  communion  referred  to,  is 
communion  with  one's  own  particular  church, 
and  not  with  other  churches,  either  by  admitting 


*  Millies  excusa.  VideBAYLE,  Did.  Historique  et  Critique.  ArL 
Calvin,  note  F. 

t  eo  piorum  fere  omnium  favore, — quem  nunquam  vote  expe- 

tere,  nedum  sperare  ausus  fuissem. 

Vid.  ep,  supra  rit. 


180 

their  members  or  joining  in  their  ordinances,  has 
nothing  to  support  it,,  but  flies  in  the  face  of  the 
very  chapter  which  discusses  the  subject.  Its  title 
is,  "  Of  the  TRUE  CHURCH  iviih  which  we  are  to  cul- 
tivate unity ;  because  she  is  the  mother  of  all  the 
pious"* — a  clesignation  belonging  only  to  the  one 
church  of  God,  and  not  to  any  sect.  And  the  third 
part  of  that  chapter  is  devoted  to  the  proof  of  this 
proposition,  "  That  we  are  in  no  manner  to  for- 
sake the  caiholick  church  and  the  communion  of 
saints.^^  ^'  0)i  which  account^''''  it  is  added,  "  the 
errmirs  of  the  Novatians,  Anabaptists,  and 
other  scKiSMATiCAL  and  idle-minded  men,  con- 
teming  this  doctrine ^  are  abundant!}/  refuted.'''^ 
But  what  Calvin  calls  the  "  errours  of  the  No- 
vatians,'^  &c.  are  precisely  the  arguments  urged 
against  the  communion  which  these  pages  re- 
commend and  vindicate.  Therefore,  the  com- 
munion  spoken  of,  is  not  simply  that  which  we 
ought  to  maintain  with  our  own  particular 
branch  of  the  church,  but  which  we  ought  to 
maintain  with  the  whole  church  through  the  mc- 


*  De  vera  ecclesia  cum  qua  colenda  est  unitas :  quia  piorum  omni- 
um nsater  est. 

t  3.  A  sancta  ecclesia  Catholica  et  sanctorum  communione  noii 
est  ullo  modo  discedendum  :  ea  propter  Novatianorum,  Anabaptista* 
r.im,  ac  ejusmodi  schismaticorum  et  male  feriatorum  hominura  circii 
hariG  doctrinam  errores,  a  sect.  10.  ad  fin-  cap.  abunde  refelluntur. 

Tom.  IX.  p.  2T0. 


181 

diurn  of  any  one  of  her  branches  to  which  we 
have  access.     That  this  is  Calvin's  meaning, 
appears  not  only  from  the  whole  tenour  of  his 
discourse^  but  also  from  his  anxiety  expressed  in 
a  letter  to  Archbishop  Cranmek,  to  nnite  all  the 
reformed  churches.     Episcopacy  w^as  establish- 
ed in  England  ;  Calvin  was  a  divine-right  Pres- 
byterian.    Yet  even  that  difference  was  not  suf- 
ficient, in  his  eyes,  to  hinder  communion.     Ac 
cording  to  the  fiiSt  principle  of  the  Reformation, 
he  was  willing  to  compound  for  the  pure  word 
and  worship  of  Crod,  i.  e.  in  its  substance.     For, 
in  a  letter  of  Oct.  22,  1548,  he  congratulates  the 
Lord  Protector  of  England,  on  his  having  been 
a  principal  instrument  in  "restoring  the  pure  and 
sincere  worship  of  God,  and  the  sound  preach- 
ing of  his  word."^     Yet  in  that  very  letter  he 
entreats  the  protector  to  complete  the  work  of  re- 
formation ;  and  even  points  out  corruptions  and 
abuses  which  needed  the  knife. 

No  doubt  can  now  remain  as  to  the  nature  of 
that  communion  for  which  Calvin,  backed  bv 


*  Est  sane  de  quo  gratias  agarous  Deo  et  Patri  nostro,  quod  opera 
tuauti  voluerit  ad  tantum  opus,  ut  per  te  in  primis  purum  et  sincerum 
suuin  cuitum  in  regno  Angliae  restitueret ;  Pratstiterit  etiam  ut  salatis 
doctrina  audiretur  passim,  etfideliter  annunciaretur  omnibus  qui  aures 
arrlgerc  dignarentur. 


182 

the  greatest  and  best  men  of  the  age,  so  ner- 
vously and  eioquently  contends.  And  their  sup- 
port of  his  doctrine  precludes  the  necessity  of 
further  detail  as  to  private  opinion.  Even  illus- 
triors  names  might  seem  to  be  introduced  more 
for  ostentation  than  for  conviction.  For  in  very 
deed,  the  voice  of  Calvin,  on  this  subject,  is  the 
general  voice  of  the  people  of  God  in  that  age 
of  grace  and  truth. 

To  their  doctrine  they  added  their  example.  I 
do  not  say  that  their  example  corresponded  per- 
fectly with  their  principles.  It  would  be  a  miracle 
of  high  degree,  if  they  who  are  imperfect  in  all 
things  else,  should  be  perfect  in  their  love.  Nor 
have  I  forgotten  the  separation  of  the  Lutheran 
from  the  other  Protestant  churches.  Yet  this 
took  place  against  the  sentiments  of  Luther  and 
his  most  distinguished  associates.  It  W'as  not  ef- 
fected without  a  struggle  ;  and  did  not  continue 
without  magnanimous  efforts  to  heal  the  wound. 

Calvin  not  only  subscribed  the  Augustan^  i.  e. 
the  Lutheran  confession,  as  he  himself  informs 
us  ;*  but  he  expressly  declares,  in  a  letter  to  his 
friend  Farell,  that  "  the  petty  peculiarities"  in 
the  Lutheran  church,  evidently  meaning  that 
they  were  petty  when  compared  with  the  great 


Ep.  ScHALINGIO,  p.  113. 


183 

things  of  the  common  salvation,  were  no  ju3t 
causes  of  disunion.* 

Henry  Alting,  professor  of  divinity  at  HeideU 
berg  J  and  afterwards  at  GrGumgen^  and  a  distin- 
guished member  of  the  Synod  of  Dordi^j  "  as- 
sures us,  that  this  was  the  common  opinion  of  the 
reformed  divines  who  followed  Bucer  and  Cal- 
vin. For,  proposing  this  question  in  his  prob- 
lems, tvhether  the  orthodox  may  lawfully  communi- 
cate in  the  Lord'^s  supper  with  the  Lutherans  ? 
he  resolves  it  in  the  affirmative,  upon  these  four 
arguments  : 

"  1.  Because  they  ail  agree  in  fundamentals. 

"  2.  Because  men  ought  to  preserve  unity  in 
the  church,  and  hate  schism. 

"  3.  Because  we  have  the  example  of  the 
prophets,  and  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  for  com- 
municating in  more  corrupt  churches  than  the 
Lutherans  are. 

"  4.  Because  the  best  divines  of  the  last  age," 
the  Reformation,  "  have  approved  it,  as  Capito, 
BucER,  Calvin,  Martyr,  Zanchy,  Ursin,  Tos- 
SANUS,  Par.eus,  Scultetus,  and  others  :  some  of 
whom^  as  they  had  occasion^  did  actually  com- 
municate with  them.^^t 

*  Calv.  Farello.  p.  9. 

t  Bayle,  Diet.  Crit.  Art.  Alting.  Tom.L  p.  169,  170. 
:(:  Alting.  Theol.  Problem  Par.  2.  Probl  18.  p.  331.  quoted  as 
above  by  Bingha  m,  Orig.  ecchs.  Vol.  IL  p.  825.  Fol. 

-24 


184 

Peter  Martyk,  a  man  of  high  standing 
among  the  reform erSj  went  over  to  England  at 
the  invitation  of  Cranmer  by  order  of  Edward 
Vf . ;  andj  though  far  enough  from  holding  the  di- 
vine right  of  Episcopacy,  scrupled  not  to  join  in 
permanent  communion  with  the  church  of  Eng- 
land, and  to  accept  a  theological  chair  in  the 
university  of  Oxford  ;  and  that  he  would  as  free- 
ly have  communed  with  the  Lutherans jhsid  they 
been  as  forbearing  as  himself,  may  be  gathered 
from  the  disapprobation  with  which  he  mentions 
the  harsh  behaviour  of  some  Lutheran  ministers 
toward  one  of  their  brethren,  for  kindly  receiv- 
ing the  English  Protestants,  when  they  fled 
from  the  persecutions  of  bloody  Mary,  and  for 
communicating  sometimes  with  the  church  of 
Friezland.* 

Knox,  the  Scottish  Elijah,  as  firm  a  Presbyte- 
rian as  Calvin  himself,  and  still  less  indulgent 
to  what  he  considered  as  reliques  of  Papal  su- 
perstition— even  Knox — with  all  his  antiepisco- 
pal  feelings,  "  officiated  for  a  considerable  time  in 
the  church  of  England"! — assisted  in  revising 
the   Book   of   Common  PraycrX — accepted,    at 


*  See  his  letter  lo  Calvin,  frcm  Strasburgh,  23d  Sept.  1555,  at  the 
end  of  his  Loci  cornmimes,  p.  7T0.  ed.  Genev.  1624,  Fdl. 

t  M'Crie's  life  of  John  Enox,  Vol.  I.  p.  102.  Lond.  1813.  Bvo. 
t  Ib.  p.  27. 


r»o 


Frankfort  on  the  Maine,  the  charge  of  a  congre- 
gation composed  of  English  exiles,  differing 
much  in  their  views  of  pubiick  worship — and, 
^'when  the  congregation  had  agreed  to  adopt 
the  order  of  the  Genevan  church,  and  requested 
him  to  proceed  to  administer  the  communion 
according  to  it ;  although  he  approved  of  that 
order,  he  declined  to  carry  it  into  practice,  until 
their  learned  brethren  in  other  places  were  con- 
suited.  At  the  same  time  he  signified  that  he 
had  not  freedom  to  administer  the  sacraments 
agreeably  to  the  English  liturgy."^  The  difficul- 
ty resulted  in  a  compromised  ^'  form  of  worship, 
in  which  some  things  were  taken  from  the  Eng- 
lish liturgy,  and  others  added  which  were 
thought  suitable  to  their  circumstances.  This 
w^as  to  continue  in  force  until  the  end  of  the  next 
April ;  and  if  any  dispute  arose  in  the  interval,  it 
was  to  be  referred  to  five  of  the  most  celebrated 
foreign  divines.  The  agreement  was  subscribed 
by  all  the  members  of  the  congregation  ;  thanks 
were  publickly  returned  to  God  for  the  restora- 
tion of  harmony  ;  and  the  communion  was  re- 
ceived as  a  pledge  of  union,  and  the  burial  of 
all  past  offences. "t 

It  is  well  known  to  have  been  a  favourite  ob- 

*  Ib.  p.  I'sb.  f  iB.p.  128. 


186 

ject  with  Calvin  to  form  a  general  union  of  all 
the  Protestant  churches.  This  he  never  could 
have  proposed  without  a  full  conviction  that 
they  were  sufficiently  united  in  principle  to  be 
united  in  fact ;  and  to  reciprocate,  by  agreement, 
the  most  liberal  and  ample  communion  in  the 
things  of  Christ.  The  idea  of  reducing  them  all 
exactly  to  his  own  standard  of  propriety  never 
entered  his  mind.  He  Avas  too  much  of  a  Chris- 
iian  to  as!:  for  so  huge  a  sacrifice;  and  too  much 
of  a  statesman  to  suppose  it  possible.  His  plan, 
as  is  clear  from  the  whole  drift  of  his  ^vritings 
and  advices,  would  have  been  to  bind  them  up 
in  a  great  confederation  ;  bringing  them  as  near  to 
each  other  as  the  state  of  public  habit,  under  the 
influence  of  mutual  candour  and  concession, 
should  permit ;  fixing  them  firmly  there,  and 
leaving  all  the  rest  to  evangelical  liberty.  So 
that,  as  in  old  time,  a  Christian,  passing  from  his 
ow^n  church  and  country  to  another,  should  be 
welcomed  as  a  citizen  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  should  conform  peaceably  to  the  order  of 
that  province  of  the  kingdom  which  should  thus 
receive  him.  Could  he  have  succeeded  in  re- 
moving the  grosser  offences  which  remained  in 
some  of  the  churches,  his  wishes  had  been  fulfill- 
ed— his  holy  triumph  completed.  For  as  no  one 
more  thoroughly  detested,  or  pertinaciously  re- 


187 

sistedj  whatever  tended,  even  remotely,  to  en- 
snare  conscience,  or  to  reconcile  the  minds  of 
men  to  the  superstitions  and  idolatry  of  Rome  ; 
so  no  one  ever  treated,  with  more  majestic  disre- 
gard,  those  unessential  peculiarities  about  which 
so  much  heat  is  kindled  by  vanity.  His  critics 
have  set  down  such  things  to  the  score  of  his. 
piide,  mostly  if  not  merely,  because  they  could 
not  rise  to  the  level  of  his  magnanimity  :  just  as 
they  have  mistaken  for  arrogance,  that  manly 
and  subduing  spirit  which  walks  in  the  upper 
regions  of  light  and  truth.  He,  in  effect,  said  to 
the  Lutheran  and  English  churches.  Keep  your 
"smaller  observances;"  let  us  have  no  discord 
on  their  account ;  but  let  us  march,  in  one  solid 
column,  under  the  Captain  of  salvation ;  and,  with 
undivided  counsels,  pour  in  the  legions  of  the 
cross  upon  the  territory  of  darkness  and  death. 
"  I  wish,"  says  he,  in  a  letter  to  Cranmer,  "  I 
wish  it  could  be  brought  about,  that  men  of 
learning  and  dignity  from  the  principal  churches 
might  have  a  meeting  ;  and,  after  a  careful  dis- 
cussion of  the  several  points  of  faidi,  might  hand 
down  to  posterity  the  doctrine  of  the  scripture 
settled  by  their  common  judgment.  But  among 
the  greatest  evils  of  our  age  this  also  is  to  be 
reckoned,  that  our  churches  are  so  distracted  one 
from  another,  that  human  society  scarcely  flou- 


188 

rishes  among  us,  much  less  that  holy  communi- 
on between  the  members  of  Christ,  which  all 
profess  in  words,  and  few  sincerely  cultivate  in 
fact. — —Thus  it  happens,  that,  by  the  dissipa- 
tion of  its  members,  the  body  of  the  church  lies 
prostrate  and  mangled.  As  to  myself,  were  I  like- 
ly to  be  of  any  service,  I  should  not  hesitate,  were 
it  necessary,  to  cross  ten  seas  for  such  a  purpose. 
If  the  question  w^ere  only  concerning  giving  aid 
to  England^  that  v»^ould  be  with  me  a  sufficiently 
powerful  reason.  Now^,  ivhen  the  object  is  to  ob- 
tain such  an  agreement  of  learned  men  upon  strict 
scriptural  principles^  as  may  accomplish  an  union  of 
churches  hi  other  respects  widely  asunder^  I  do  not 
think  it  lawful  for  me  to  decline  any  labours  or 
troubles,^ '^ 

The  reader  will  take  notice,  that  this  letter  was 


*  Atque  utinam  impetrari  posset,  ut  in  locum  aliquem  docti  et  graves 
viri  ex  praclpuig  Ecclesiis  coiveHt,  ac  singulis  fide:  capitlbu*  diligenter 
'^Tccussis,  de  ronimuni  omnium  senteatia  certam  posieris  traderent  scrip- 
tnra?  doctrinam.  Caeterum  in  maximis  feculi  nostri  mails  hoc  quoque 
numerandani  est,  quod  ita  aliae  ab  aliis  distractae  sunt  Ecclesije,  ut  vix 
huraana  jam  inter  nos  vigeat  societas,  nedum  emineat  sancta  membro- 
nmi  Christi  communicatio,  quam  ore  profitentur  omnes,  pauci  reipsa 

sincere  colunt. Ita  fit,  ut  raembris  dissipatis,  lacerum  jaceat  Eccle- 

siae  corpus.  Quantum  ad  me  attinet,  siquis  mei  usur  fore  videbitur,  ne 
decern  quidem  maria,  si  opus  git,  ob  earn  rem  trajicere  pigeat.  Si  de  ju- 
vando  tantum  Angli^e  regno  ageretur,  jam  mihi  ea  eatis  legitima  ratio 
foret.  Nunc  cum  quaei  atur  gravis  et  ad  scriptures  normam  probe  com- 
positus  doctorum  honinum  concensus,  quo  Ecclesiae  procul  alioqui  dis- 


189 

written  in  1551,  several  years  before  some  of 
the  principal  Protestant  confessions  were  pub- 
lished. Tlie  consequence  was,  that  the  church-, 
es  had  no  proper  puhlick  understanding.  The 
mighty  business  of  the  reformation  was  carried 
on,  and  the  connexion  of  its  interests  maintain- 
ed, chiefly  by  the  correspondence  of  individuals 
in  different  parts  of  Europe.  It  is  this  state  of 
things  in  which  churches,  as  such,  hardly  knew 
one  another,  that  Calvin  describes,  deplores, 
and  wished  to  amend.  Nothing  is  further  from 
his  meaning,  than  that  their  respective  membei^ 
^vould  not  commune  with  each  other  in  ail  Chris- 
tian ordinances,  as  they  had  opportunity.  Re- 
pugnancies on  that  head  were  then  confined  to 
the  Jjiitherans  and  Anabaptists.  When  the  Pro- 
testant churches  had,  with  one  voice,  glorified 
God  in  their  good  confessions  of  his  truth,  one 
of  the  measures  which  lay  so  near  Calvin's  heart 
was  partially  executed.  He  w  ouid  have  preferred 
a  joint-confession^  as  the  bond  of  visible  union 
and  communion.  Such  a  confession  must  ne- 
cessarily have  excluded  all  local  peculiarities — all 
minute  and  secondarv  matters :  and  instead  of 


*lt3B  inter  se  coalesrant.  niilils  vel  iaboi  ibu3  vel  luolcitiis  parccre  fas 
raihl  esse  arliltror.  * 

Cafv.  Evi^f.  3».  61. 


190 

arguing  the  several  classes)  of  contessors  to  be  of 
different  religions  races  onaccountof  things  which 
depend  upon  climate,  habit,  state  of  society,  and^ 
such  like  incidents,  would  have  marked  their 
common  origin  by  their  essential  resemblance. 
Varieties  not  affecting  the  substance  of  religion 
would  have  been  no  better  reason  with  them  for 
questioning  a  man's  relation  to  them,  and  his 
claim  upon  their  holiest  fellowship,  than  tawny 
skin  or  crisped  hair  is,  with  believers  in  God's 
word,  for  denying  to  be  of  their  own  species  and 
entitled  to  their  kind  offices,  one  who  has  their 
bones,  sinews,  flesh,  face,  voice,  faculties,  and 
other  proper  attributes  of  human  nature.  This  is 
a  scheme  worthy  of  reformers.  It  was  Calvin's  : 
it  is  the  Bible's. 

What  this  lover  of  peace  with  truth  projected 
upon  a  large  scale,  was  actually  attempted  and 
exeguted,  after  his  death,  upon  a  smaller  one ; 
sufficient,  however,  to  shew  which  way  the  cur- 
rent of  Christian  charity  was  setting  in. 

The  agreement  of  Poland,  {Polonice  consensus) 
at  the  Synod  of  Sendomir,  in  1570,  six  years  af- 
ter Calvin's  decease,  embracing  the  churches  of 
o-reaterand  lesser  Poland,  which  were  orsranized 
under  the  Augshurghox  Lutheran  confession,  and 
under  the  Helvetic  or  Swiss  confession,  what 
would  now  be  called  Calvinistic  ;  as  also  under 


191 

the  confession  of  the  Waldenses,  was  bottomed 
upon  those  comprehensive  principles  which  sup- 
ported the  plan  of  Calvin. 

This  consensus  was  for  the  express  purpose  of 
wiping  away  the  reproach  of  their  enemies,  and 
of  promoting  brotherly  concord  and  communion 
on  the  ground  of  their  agreement  in  the  leading 
truths  of  the  gospel ;  all  things  else  being  mat- 
ters of  forbearance. 

*  "  Of  this  holy  and  mutual  agreement,"  say 


*  Hujus  autcm  sancti  mutuique  concensus  vinculum  fore  arbitrati  su- 
mus  convenimusque,  ut,  quenmd'uadura  illi  nos  nostrasque  ecclesias,  et 
confessionem  nostram  in  hac  Synodo  publicatam,et  Fratruni,  orthodox- 
as  esse 'testantur ;  Sic  etiam  noi^  illorum  ecclesias  eodem  Christiano 
ainore  prosequamur,  et  orthodoxas  fateamur,  Extremumqne  valedica- 
mus  et  ad  altura  silentiura  imponamus  omnibus  rixis,  distractionibus,  disc*^ 
sidiis ;  quibus  evangeli  cursus  non  sine  maxima  piorura  ofFensione  impe- 
ditus  est;  et  unde  adversariis  nostris  non  levis  calumniandi  et  vera; 
Christianae  religioni  nostras  contradicendi  occa?io  sit  subministrata. 

Cluin  potius  paci  et  tranquillitati  publica?  studere,  charitatem  mutu- 
am  execere,  et  operas  mutuas  ad  aedificationem  ecelesiae,  pro  fraterna 
conjunction e  nostra,  praestare  debemus, 

'  Adhasc  recipimus  mutuo  consensu,  omni  studio  nostris  fratribus  om- 
nibus persuasuros,  atque  eos  invitaturos  ad  hunc  Christianura  et  unani" 
mem  consensum  amplectendum,  coleadum,  et  conservandum ;  illumque 
alendum  et  obsignandum,  prascipue  auditione  verbi,  (frequentando  tarn 
hujus  qiiam  alterius  cujusque  confessionis  ccetus)  et  sacramentorum  usu : 
observato  tamen  recto  ordine,  et  gradu  tam  Uisciplinae  quam  consuetu- 
diuis  uniuscujusque  Ecclesiae. 

Ritus  autem  et  caereraonias  uniiiscujusque  ecclesiae  liberos  hac  Con- 
cordia et  conjunctione  relinquimus.  Non  enim  multum  refert  qui  ritufs 
ob^erventur,  modo  sarta  tecta  et  incorrupta  exi«tat  ip?a  doctrina  et 
fundanientum  fidei  ac  salutls  nostrae.     Quern  ad  modimi  et  ipsa  confer- 

25 


m2 

fliey,  •'  ^ve  have  thought  and  agreed  that  it  would 
be  a  confirmation,  if  as  they,"  the  Lutherans^ 
'^  bear  witness  that  we,  and  our  church,  and  our 
confession,  published  in  this  Synod,  and  the 
churches  and  confession  of  the  brethren,"  (JVcd- 
(lenses)  "  are  orthodox :  so  also  we  should  mani- 
fest the  same  Christian  love  toward  their  church- 
es, and  should  acknowledge  their  orthodoxy  :  and 
should,  on  both  sides,  abandon  and  consign  to 
silence,  all  quarrels,  distractions,  and  dissensions, 
by  which  the  course  of  the  gospel,  to  the  very 
great  offence  of  many  pious  people,  is  hindered  ; 
and  by  which  no  light  occasion  is  furnished  to 


sio  Augustana  et  Saxonica  de  ea  re  decent;  et  in  hac  confessione  nos- 
tra, in  praisenti  Synodo  Sendomii-iensi  publicata,  id  ipsum  expressimus. 

Atquc  lit  Colophoneni  hiiic  con^ensui  et  mutnaj  concordiae  impona- 

iniis,  ad  banc  fraternani  societateiu  coni-ervandani  tuendanique,  non  in-- 

coramodum  fore  putaiuur!,  in  locum  certum  convenire,  ubi  una  exrautu- 

h  confee^sionibus,  compendium  corporis  doctrinae  (improbitate  hostiupj 

ad  id  adacti)  eliceremuH,  et  in  publicum  ederemus;  ut  invidorum  homi- 

uum  ora  obturarentur,  cum  maximo  omnium  piorum  j-olatio:  sub  titulo 

omnium  ecclesiarum  Polonlcarum  reformatarum,  et  Litliuanicarurn,  ei 

Sa.  ogiticarum,  nostra?  confei-sioai  coneentientium. 

Datis  igltur  junctisque  dextrit,  sancte  promisimus  et  recepimus  invi- 

cem  omnes,  fidem  et  pacera  colere    fove;  e.  et  in  die?  ad  a?dificationera 

regni  Dei  magis  magii-que  amplificare  velie;  orane  que  occasioned  dis- 

tractionis  ecclesiarum  evitaturos.     Denique,  ee  iwmemore?  oblitogque 

i^ui  ipsiius,  ut  ve/os  Dei  mini;  tro^  decet.  ^olius  Je.su  Christi  Salvatoris 

nostri  gioriam  promoturos;  et  evangelii  ipsiu.^  veritatem  propagatures 

iHin  factis  turn  dietis,  reccpimu3. 

Stkt.  Conf.  p.  2.  p.  289,  290. 


193 

our  adversaries,  both  of  calumniating  ourselves^ 
and  of  opposing  our  true  Christian  rehgion.  It 
is  rather  our  duty  to  study  the  public  peace  and 
tranquility  :  to  exercise  mutual  charity  ;  and  to 
employ,  according  to  our  brotherly  union,  our 
Jiiutual  efforts  for  the  edification  of  the  church. 

"  We,  moreover,  pledge  ourselves  to  use  our  ut- 
most endeavours  to  persuade  and  invite  all  our 
brethren  to  embrace,  respect,  and  preserve  this 
our  Christian  and  unanimous  agreement ;  and  to 
cherish  and  seal  it  especially  by  hearing  of  the 
wordj  (in  frequenting  the  assemblies  of  both  con- 
fessions^) and  by  the  use  of  the  sacraments :  al- 
ways observing  good  order^  arid  the  rule  both  of  dis- 
cipline and  custom  in  each  of  the  churches  re.s^ 
jpectively. 

^'  But  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  each  church 
we  do,  by  this  our  hearty  consent,  leave  free. 
For  it  makes  little  difference  what  rites  are  ob- 
served, provided  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  our 
faith  and  salvation  be  untouched  and  uncorrupt- 
ed,  as  the  Augustan  and  Saxon  confession  teach 
on  that  head  ;  and  as  we  have  expressed  the 
same  in  this  our  confession,  published  in  the  pre-, 
sent  Synod  of  Sendomir. 

"And  to  complete  this  our  consent  and  agree- 
ment, we  have  thought  that,  in  order  to  preserve 
this  our  brotherly  association,  it  will  not  be  in- 


194  * 

convenient  to  meet  at  some  appointed  place, 
where  we  may  together  form  a  compend  of  doc- 
trine taken  from  our  mutual  confessions ;  and 
publish  it  to  the  world  to  stop  the  mouths  of  in- 
vidious men,  and  minister  great  consolation  to 
all  the  pious. 

"  Having,  therefore,  given  to  each  other  the 
right  hand  of  union,  we  have  all  most  sacredly 
promised  and  pledged  ourselves,  to  cultivate, 
nourish,  and  daily  to  aim  at  increasing,  our  peace 
and  faith,  to  the  building  up  the  kingdom  of 
God  ;  and  that  we  will  shun  all  occasions  of  dis- 
tracting the  churches.  Finally,  we  have  pledged 
ourselves,  that  regardless  of  selfish  considera- 
tions, as  becomes  the  true  ministers  of  God,  we 
will  promote  only  the  glory  of  Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour  ;  and  will  propagate  the  truth  of  his 
gospel  in  word  and  deed." 

Next  comes  a  prayer  for  the  divine  blessing ; 
then  the  subscriptions  to  this  agreement:  and  the 
instrument  closes  with  the  1st  verse  of  the  cxxxiii 
psalm — ^'Behold  how  good  and  how  pleasant  it  is 
for  brethren  to  dwell  together  in  iinitij  !  /" 

A  few  days  after  the  ratification  of  this  consen- 
sus^ viz.  on  the  Lord's  day,  the  28th  of  May, 
1570,  it  was  carried  into  eflfect  in  the  following 
manner:  viz.  "  The  ministers, patrons,  and  whole 
congregation  of  the  Bohoemic  confession,  both 


195 

Poles  and  Germans  of  both  sexes,  proceeded  in 
a  body  from  their  own  to  the  Lutheran  place  of 
worship,  to  attend  morning  service  ;  and  there, 
the  hearers  of  both  parties  being  solemnly  as- 
sembled, two  of  the  ^FaZiZen^fftn  ministers  preach- 
ed, one  to  the  Poles,  the  other  to  the  Germans, 
In  the  same  way,  in  the  afternoon,  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  Aiigusian  confession,  with  their  pa- 
trons and  ministers,  having  made  a  procession 
from  their  church  through  the  city,  went  to  the 
church  of  the  Bohemian  brethren,  in  the  sub- 
urbs, the  Poles  to  the  Poles,  the  Germans  to  the 
Germans  f  and  there  two  Lutheran  ministers 
preached  to  them  the  word  of  God.  In  each 
place,  after  reading  the  agreement,  the  ministers 
gave  their  attestation  aloud  to  the  holy  concord 
and  union  ;  and  exhorted  their  hearers  on  both 
sides  to  cherish  and  guard  it  as  a  singular  gift  of 
God  ;  and,  laying  aside  all  groundless  suspicions 
of  each  other,  now  that  they  had  become  one  in 
•the  Lord  and  in  his  truth,  to  keep  his  way,  and 
cultivate  brotherly  love.  This  was  accompanied 
with  ardent  prayers  to  God,  and  with  the  great- 
est joy  and  acclamation  of  all  present,  exclaim- 
ing, 'Behold,  hoiv  good  and  pleasant  it  isforhreth- 


*  i.  e.  the  Lutheran  Poles  to  the  Bohemian  Poles ;  and  the  Luthe-f 
ran  Germans  to  the  Bohemian  Germans. 


196 

ren  to  dwell  together  in  unity  IP  Finally,  the 
whole  being  made  one  church,  sung  with  one 
voice  that  hymn  of  exultation  and  thanksgiving, 
'  We  praise  thee,  O  God,  &e'."*  This  "  agree- 
ment," was  unanimously  confirmed  in  a  general 
Synod  at  Cracoiv^  Sept.  1573.  And,  as  the  con- 
clusion of  their  business,  *'  The  whole  Synod, 
the  brethren,  superintendants,  elders,  minis- 
ters, patrons,  and  all  the  rest,  ratified  and  sealed 
that  holy  consent  and  union  ;  and,  finally,  after 
joining  together  in  publick  worship,  and  in  the 
communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord^  ac- 
cording to  the  ceremonies  of  the  church  at  Cracow^ 
they  returned  home,  rejoicing  in  brotherly  love, 
and  praising  the  Lord."t 

This  same  agreement  was  reconfirmed  in  a 
general  Synod  at  Petrikow,  a  town  of  Great  Po- 
land, June  1378,  and  a  regulation  there  made, 
that  a  congregation  of  either  confession,  (Luthe- 


*  Synt.  Conf.  p.  2.  p.  ?.96. 

t  Porro  tota  hsec  Cracoviensis  Synodus,  omnium  confess! onumfra- 
tres,  Superattendentes,  Seniores,  Ministri,  et  Domini  Patroni,  quorum 
hie  sunt  expressa  uomina,  et  reliqui  congregati,  sanctum  consensum  ao 
unionera — confirraarunt  et  obsignarunt :  denique,  Sacra  synaxi,  corpus 
et  sanguineoi  Doiuini  siroul  percipientes,  iis  caeremoniis  quas  Ecclesia 
Cracoviensis  in  usu  habet.  Atque  tta,  in  amoce  fraterno  gaudentes  et 
T>ominum  collaudantes,  ad  siios  redierunt. 

lB.p.304. 


197 

lan  or  Calvinist,)  might  freely  call  a  ministei^ 
from  the  other.* 

The  renewal  of  the  agreement  was  repeated 
in  a  general  Synod  at  Uladislaw^  1583;  and  again 
at  Tornav^y  in  Hungary,  1595,t  and  continued  to 
be  religiously  observed  as  late  at  least  as  16344 

This  spirit  was  not  confined  to  Poland,  Of 
all  the  Protestant  churches,  none  did  more  and 
suffered  more  for  the  faith  of  Christ  than  the 
churches  of  France.  Purer  in  doctrine,  fairer  ia 
government,  and  chaster  in  discipline,  the  world 
never  saw.  Their  treasure  and  their  blood  flow- 
ed alike,  and  flowed  freely  in  the  cause  of  their 
Redeemer.  And  none  w^ere  more  forward  in  that 
labour  of  love,  the  union  of  Christian  churches 
in  one  great  spiritual  commonwealth. 

It  appears,  from  the  records  of  the  Synod  of 
St.  Foy,  1578,  that  an  "  assembly  of  many  depu- 
ties from  sundry  famous  reformed  churches, 
kingdoms,  and  provinces,  at  which  attended  Mr. 
EsNARD,  as  a  representative  from  several  Frenck 
churches,  met  at  Franckfort,  in  1577,  by  invita- 


*  VII.  Siquidem  imio  facta  est  inter  nos  Helvetica^,  Augustanae,  et 
Bohsemica?  confessioni  addictos,  liberum  erit  ecclesiae  seu  Patronis  cce« 
tus  unius  confessionis  justis  causis  ac  bono  ordine,  a  Superattendea- 
tibus  alterius  confessionis  ministrum  petere  ac  ad  se  vocare. 

IB.  p.  307. 

t  Ib.  p.  308.  p.  316.  %  DAYEiSfAWTii  seat,  ad  Joh.  Dcb^ujs^ 
p.  S,  Cantab.  1640. 


198 

tion  of  the  Prince  Elector  John  Casimir,  prince 
Palatine^  and  duke  of  Bavaria — that  they  laid 
down  several  means  and  expedients  for  uniting 
all  the  reformed  churches  in  Christendom  in  one 
common  bond  of  u7iion ;  as  also  for  terminating 
the  differences  which  had  risen  up  and  were  fo- 
mented among  them  by  their  common  adversa- 
ries ;  and  for  hindering  some  hot-headed  and 
bigotted  divines  from  condemning,  as  they  had 
threatened,  even  to  Anathema,  the  greatest  and 
soundest  part  by  far  of  the  Christian  reformed 
churches — and,  for  the  suppression  of  such  im- 
prudent and  wicked  designs,  unanimously  re- 
solved to  petition  the  princes  of  the  empire,  who 
adhered  to  the  confession  of  Auxhourg,  i.  e.  the 
Jjutheran  princes — and  had,  moreover,  given  an 
express  charge,  that  one  uniform  confession  of 
faith  should  be  framed,  as  the  general  and  common 
confession  of  all  Protestants  ;  and  several  copies 
of  it  sent  to  all  those  kingdoms  and  provinces  in 
which  those  churches  were  gathered,  to  be  ex- 
amined and  approved  by  them,  and  to  be  crown- 
ed by  their  joint  consent  and  approbation." — It 
appears  also,  "  that  they  had  agreed  upon  the 
time  and  place  for  the  meeting  of  deputies  from 
the  churches  concerned,  and  that  they  had  sent 
a  special  invitation  to  the  French  churches  to 
send  thither  persons  of  approved  piety,  integrity. 


199 

and  experience,  with  full  powers  to  treat  and  de- 
cide on  all  points  of  doctrine,  and  other  matters 
concerning  the  union,  peace,  and  preservation  of 
the  churches,  and  the  pure  worship  of  God." 

This  proposal  was  received  with  great  satis- 
faction by  the  general  Synod  of  the  French 
churches;  and  four  ministers,  together  with  the 
"most  illustrious  Lord  Viscount  of  Twre/me," 
were  appointed  commissioners  to  the  general 
meeting  of  deputies.* 

The  same  design  was  prosecuted  by  the  Sy- 
nod of  FiGEAC,  in  1579,  at  which  the  confession 
of  faith  of  the  Dutch  and  French  churches  in  the 
low  countries  was  approved ;  and  a  consultation 
was  held  on  the  most  proper  means  to  "  reunite 
the  several  confessions  of  all  those  nations  which 
agree  in  doctrine,  into  one  common  confession, 
and  which  may  hereafter  be  approved  by  all 
those  nations.  And  this  pursuant  to  the  project 
laid  down  in  the  late  conference  at  Neustadt, 

Sept  15T7."t 

With  equal  willingness  the  Synod  of  Vitre, 
1583,  embraced  a  proposition  made  in  their  own 


*  auiCK's  Synodicon,  Vol.  I.  p.  120,  121.  Fol. 

+  Ib.  p.  13S.  It  would  seemfroiii  this,  that  there  were  two  conferences 
held  in  15TT  for  a  Protestant  union ;  one  at  Neustadt  in  Brunswick, 
Germany,  and  the  other  at  Frankfort ;  for  this  latter  also  took  place 
in  September.     Quick,  Vol.  I.  p.  121. 

2G 


200 

body  for  '^  an  union  arid  agreement  between  the 
churches  of  Genriany  and  thehs — they  solicited 
Mr.  Chandieu  to  undertake  a  mission  for  that  pur- 
pose ;  and  Mr.  Salnar^  after  conference  with 
Lord  Du  Plessis,  to  write  in  their  name  and  by 
their  authority  on  the  subject,  to  the  princes  and 
divines  of  Germany.* 

Twenty  years  afterwards,  viz.  in  1603,  at  the 
Synod  of  Gap^  the  brethren  of  Dauphiny  "  de- 
sired that  some  means  might  be  contrived  for  a 
conference  and  union  with  the  Lutheran  church- 
es in  Germany^  that  so  the  schism  between  them 
and  the  French  churches  might  be  removed." 
Whereupon,  the  assembly  "  desirous  to  see  the 
fruits  of  such  a  noble  project,  ordered  letters  to 
be  despatched  to  the  orthodox  universities  of 
Germany^  England^  Geneva^  Easily  and  Leyden ; 
and  to  Messieurs  des  Gourdon  and  de  Fontaines^ 
in  London,  entreating  them  to  co-operate  in  ef- 
fecting this  holy  union  ;  and  that  princes  might 
be  engaged  to  put  forth  their  authority  therein, 
that  so  they,  the  Protestant  churches,  might  all 
be  more  firmly  united  among  themselves  in  the 
confession  of  one  and  the  same  doctrine."! 

This  zeal  was  quickened  by  a  proposal  for 
such  an  union  made  by  king  James  the  VL  to 

*  Q^ieK's  Si/nodicon,  Tol.  I.  p.  153,  t  Ib.  p.  289: 


201 

the  French  churches,  obscurely  hinted  in  a  letter 
from  his  majesty  of  March  15th,  1614  ;  and  fully 
explained,  on  his  authority,  by  Mr.  David  Hume^^ 
"  for  reuniting  the  churches  of  divers  nations  into 
one  and  the  selfsame  confession  and  doctrine." 
At  their  general  Synod,  held  at  Tonneins  the 
May  following,  they  drew  the  outlines  of  a  de- 
tailed plan  of  union,  in  which  the  following  are 
conspicuous  features  : 

1.  To  avoid  the  Arminian  controversy. 

For  they  say,  that  instead  of  disputes  about 
religion,  "it  were  better  to  lay  on  the  table,  be- 
fore the  assembled  delegates,  the  several  confes- 
sions of  the  reformed  churches  of  England^  Scot- 
landj  France,  the  Netherlands,  Switzerland,  and 
the  Palatinate,  &c. ;  and,  that  out  of  all  these 
confessions,  there  might  be  framed  one  in  com- 
mon to  them  all,  in  which  divers  points  may  be 
omitted,  the  knoAvledge  whereof  is  not  needful 
to  our  everlasting  happiness.  Among  which,  the 
controversy  moved  by  Piscator,  and  several  sub- 
til opinions  broached  by  Van  Armin,"  (Arminius,) 


*  Not  the  celebrated  historian  of  that  name,  who  lived  more  than  a 
century  later;  but  a  countryman  and  probably  kinsman  of  his:  a  man 
of  quite  "  another  spirit,"  which  seems  to  have  entirely  evaporated 
before  the  family-blood  found  it:<  way  into  the  veins  of  the  unbelieving 
philosopher. 


202 

^' about  free  will^the  saints'  perseverance^  and  pre- 
destination^ may  he  reckoned.'^'' 

2.  To  avoid  contentions  about  ceremonies  and 
church-government — whicli  they  call  ^' quillets  :^^ 
i,  e.  subtleties,  niceties :  in  regard  to  which  they 
say  "A  mutual  declaration  should  be  made,  and 
added  unto  the  said  confession,  by  which  the  said 
deputies,  in  the  names  of  their  principals,  do  de- 
clare, that  the  churches  shall  not  judge  nor  con- 
demn one  another  for  this  difference^  it  not  hinder- 
ing our  mutual  agreement  in  the  same  faith  and  doc- 
trine ;  and  that  for  all  this^  ice  may  cordially  cm- 
brace  each  other  as  true  believers  and  joint-members 
of  one  and  the  same  body,^^ 

Thus  far  the  business  was  to  proceed  among 
deputies  from  the  reformed  churches  only.  They 
were  to  conclude  after  "  a  most  religious  fast," 
with  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  supper, 
^'wherein  the  pastors  from  England  and  the 
other  nations  should  all  communicate  together.'- 
And  then  to  disperse,  after  appointing  another 
day  for  a  new  meeting  within  the  year,  that  they 
might  have  an  opportunity  of  consulting  their 
respective  constituents. 

During  the  interval,  means  were  to  be  used 
for  securing  the  attendance  of  some  Lutheran  di- 
vines at  this  second  assembly  :  and  in  such  ein 
expectation  it  was  agreed. 


203 

3.  To  wave  the  points  in  debate  between  the 
reformed  and  the  Lutherans:  i.  e.  to  express  the 
doctrine  on  these  points  in  terms  which  might  be 
safe  for  conscientious,  and  satisfactory  to  modest 
men  :  and,  for  this  end,  to  model  their  agreement 
after  the  Polonice  consensus^  or  "  concordat  of  the 
PoHsh  churches,  made  at  Sendoinir^  in  the 
year  1570." 

This  second  assembly,  like  the  first,  was  to 
open  with  a  solemn  fast,  and  to  close  '*  with  the 
celebration  of  the  holy  supper  of  our  Lord,  at 
which,  both  the  Lutheran  and  other  ministers 
should  communicate  together.''^ 

On  this  plan  for  Protestant  union,  it  may  be 
proper  to  remark. 

First.  That  it  did  not  contemplate  merely  tlie 
reciprocation  of  ministerial  and  Christian  fellovv  - 
ship  in  the  several  churches,  ioxthai  had  been  in 
regular  practice  among  Protestants  all  along : 
the  majority  of  the  Lutherans  excepted.  It  went 
much  further  ;  even  to  the  organization  of  the 
whole  Protestant  interest  in  a  publick  federative 
union ;  each  of  the  component  churches  retain- 
ing, however,  its  own  independence  and  internal 
order.     It  was,  in  fact,  Calviu's  plan  revived,  or 


*  auicK,  Vol.  I.  p.  .iC-L,  k^. 


2Q4 

rather  prosecuted  ;  for  it  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  ever  abandoned. 

Secondly.  That  it  furnished  no  proof  of  the 
French  churches,  which  were  the  most  active  in 
promoting  it,  having  at  all  declined  from  their 
soundness  in  the  faith,  or  their  zeal  in  maintain- 
ing it.  For,  three  years  afterwards,  their  gene- 
ral Synod  of  Vitre^  appointed  commissioners  to 
attend  the  Synod  of  Dordt  for  the  purpose  of  de- 
ciding on  the  several  points  of  the  Anninian  con- 
troversy ;  and,  three  years  after  this,  viz.  at  their 
general  Synod  held  in  the  town  of  Alez,  1620, 
they  unanimously  approved  the  articles  agreed 
upon  at  Dordt;  incorporated  them  with  their  own 
canons,  and  ordered  them  to  be  "  sworn  and  sub- 
scribed to  by  the  pastors  and  elders  of  their 
churches,  and  by  the  doctors  and  professors  in 
their  universities  ;  and,  also  by  all  those  that 
were  to  be  ordained  and  admitted  into  the  minis- 
try, or  into  the  professor's  chair,  in  any  of  their 
universities  :  with  a  proviso,  that  if  any  one  of 
these  persons  should  reject,  either  in  whole  or  in 
part,  the  doctrine  contained  in,  and  decided  by, 
the  canons  of  the  said  council,"  of  Dordt ;  "or 
refuse  to  take  the  oath  of  consent  and  approba- 
tion, he  should  not  be  admitted  into  any  oiBce  or 
employment,  either  in  their  churches  or  univer- 


2d5 

sities."*  Thus  unequivocally  did  thej  assert,  and 
take  care  to  perpetuate  in  their  schools  and  pul- 
pits, the  pure  doctrine  of  the  gospel.  But  to 
show  how  well  they  could  unite  Catholicism  with 
fidelity — the  love  of  the  brethren  with  the  love 
of  truth  ;  and  how  cordially  they  could  take  to 
their  bosom  the  very  persons  against  whose  er- 
rours  they  raised  the  voice  of  their  testimony, 
provided  those  errours  subverted  not  the  founda- 
tion of  their  faith,  the  following  extract  from  the 
minutes  of  the  second  Synod  of  Charenton^  in 
1631,  wdll  amply  suffice  : 

"  An  act  in  favour  of  the  Lutheran  brethren^- 

"  The  province  of  Burgundy  demanding,  Whe- 
ther the  faithful  of  the  Augustane  confession 
might  he  permitted  to  contract  marriages  in  our 
churches^  and  to  present  children  in  our  churches  un- 
to baptism^  without  a  previous  abjuration  of  those 
opinions  held  by  them  contrary  to  the  belief  of  our 
chufches?  this  Synod  declareth  that,  inasmuch 
as  the  churches  of  the  confession  of  Ausbourg  do 
agree  with  the  other  reformed  churches  in  the 
imncipal  and  fundamental  points  of  the  true  reli- 
gion^ and  that  there  is  neither  superstition  nor 
idolatry  in  their  w^orship  ;  the  faithful  of  the  said 

*  QricK.  Vol.II.p.ST,  S8. 


206 

confessioiij  who  with  a  sphit  of  love  and  peacea- 
bleness  do  join  themselves  to  the  communion  of 
our  churches  in  this  kingdom,  may  be,  ivithout 
any  abjuration  at  all  Jtiade  by  them,  admitted  unto 
the  Lord'^s  table  ivith  us ;  and,  as  sureties,  may  pre- 
sent children  unto  baptism ;  they  promising  the 
consistory,  that  they  will  never  solicit  them,  ei- 
ther directly  or  indirectly,  to  transgress  the  doc- 
trine believed  and  professed  in  our  churches;  but 
will  be  content  to  instruct  and  educate  them  in 
those  points  and  articles  which  are  in  common 
between  us  and  them,  and  wherein  both  the  Lu- 
therans  and  we  are  unanimously  agreed."* 

If  from  France  we  pass  into  Holland,  w^e  shall 
there  find  the  same  generous  feeling  toward  all 
the  parts  of  the  church  of  God.  Her  early  con- 
fession, the  i56%/c,  already  quoted, shows  in  what 
light  she  contemplated  the  privilege  and  duty  of 
church-cori:imunion.  That  confession,  as  has 
been  stated,  received  the  unqualified  approbation 
of  the  continental  divines  at  the  Synod  of  Dordt, 
in  1618;  and  it  received  also,  with  the  exception 
of  its  articles  upon  church-government,  the  ap- 
probation of  the  Episcopal  divines  who  were 
sent  thither  by  JaxMes  VI. 

The  assembling  of  such  a  Synod,  and  their 

'    qricK.  Vol.  II.  p.C9?. 


207 

harmonious  proceedings,  are  the  best  practical 
commentary  upon  the  understood  principle  of 
Protestant  communion.  Here  was  a  collection 
of  representatives  from  the  reformed  churches  of 
Europe,  France  excepted,  whose  deputies  were 
stopped  by  a  mandate  of  the  king;  various  in 
their  modifications  of  order  and  rites  of  worship, 
yet  one  in  the  common  faith  of  the  gospel. 
Diitch^  German^  Genevese^  Swiss ^  all  non-episco- 
pal, joined  by  an  English  bishop  and  other  Epis- 
copal delegates,  met  together  to  discuss  and  de- 
cide one  of  the  most  serious  and  shaking  contro- 
versies that  ever  agitated  the  church  of  God. 
Here  they  unite  in  the  most  solemn  acts  of  min- 
isterial communion.  The  public  prayers  are  of- 
fered up  by  Presbyterians  in  their  own  manner. 
By  way  of  showing  their  concord  and  confidence, 
they  judge  it  expedient  to  have  now^  and  then 
sermons  in  Latin  before  the  Synod.  They  be- 
gin with  requesting  the  foreign  divines  to  under- 
take this  service  in  order.*  And  the  very  first 
man  they  place  in  the  pulpit  is  Dr.  Joseph  Hall, 
a  high-toned  Episcopalian,  then  Dean  of  Wor- 
cester^ and  afterwards  bishop  of  Norwich.  He 
preached  to  them  from  Eccles.  vii.  16.  In  his 
sermon  he  calls  the  Synod,  thus  composed,  "  a 


*  Act,  Synod  Dobdrect,  Sess.  V.  part  1.  p.  18.  1620.  Fol. 
27 


208 

most  holy  assembly  of  the  prophets."^  The 
church  of  Holland^  upon  the  supposition  of  her 
adhering  to  "  the  faith  which  she  had  till  then  re- 
ceived, and  to  the  confession  common  to  her 
with  the  other  churches  ;"  he  salutes  as  the  "  pure 
spouse  of  Christ."  And  then  exclaims,  "we  are 
brethren,  let  us  also  be  associates  !  What  have 
we  to  do  with  the  disgraceful  titles  of  Remon- 
strants^ Contra- Remonstrmiis,  Cahinists^  Armini- 
ans  ft     We  are  Christians,  let  us  also  be  of  one 


*  Sanctissima  corona  prophetarum.     Ib.  Sess.  XVI.  p.  38. 

t  These  names  were  then  recent,  and  had  not  settled  down  into  fix* 
ed  appellations,  as  some  of  them  have  done  since.  They  have  now 
become  technical  terms  in  theology  and  ecclesiastical  history  ;  and,  like 
other  technical  terms,  they  convey  very  complex  ideas  with  more  bre- 
vity and  precision  than  could  easily  be  done  by  a  periphrasis.  Every 
organization  of  men,  and  every  system  of  principles  must  have  a  name. 
This,  in  itself,  is  of  no  importance,  but  is  useful  for  the  purpose  of 
discrimination.  It  would  be  amusing,  if  it  were  not  mortifying,  to 
see  with  what  eagerness  some  men  endeavour  to  fix  a  name  upon 
others  ;  and  with  what  anxiety  these  again  labour  to  shake  it  oft'.  To 
call  one  a  Calvinlst  or  an  Arminian,  is  to  impute  to  him  the  doctrine 
maintained  by  Calvin  or  Arminius — but  it  proves  nothing.  To  refuse 
the  appellation  is  not  to  reject  the  doctrine — and  so  proves  nothing. — 
It  is  all  a  petty  squabble  about  words.  While  differences  subsist,  we 
must  talk  about  them,  and  we  may  as  well  use  the  phraseology 
which  marks  tliem.  If  "Calvinist"  and  "  Arminian,"  are  to  be  ban- 
ished there  is  no  reason  why  "  Lutheran"  and  "  Reformed,"  ''  Pro- 
testant" and  '*  Papist,"  "  Socinian,""  Arian,"  "  ITniversalist,"  ''  Epis- 
copalian," "  Presbyterian,"  and  the  whole  series  of  party  names 
should  not  go  with  them.  Suppose  it  done,  cui  bono  ?  what  do  you 
gain  ?  You  would  have  to  replace  them  with  anotlier  set ;  and  there 
is  the  old  contest  over  again.    Yet  it  is  not  to  be  denied,  liiat  hurtful 


209 

soul.  We  are  one  body,  let  us  also  be  of  one  mind. 
By  that  tremendous  name  of  the  Almighty  God 
— by  the  pious  and  gentle  bosom  of  our  com- 
mon mother — by  your  own  souls — by  the  most 
holy  compassions  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour; 
aim  at  peace,  brethren  ;  enter  into  peace,  that 
laying  aside  all  prejudice,  party-spirit,  and  evil 
affections,  we  may  all  come  to  a  happy  agree- 
ment in  the  same  truth."^ 

On  these  extracts,  which  are  in  the  general 
strain  of  the  sermon,  it  may  not  be  unseasonable 
to  remark : 

1.  That  the  reformed  churches,  Episcopal 
and  non-episcopal,  had  no  scruple,  in  those  days, 


prejudices  are  sometimes  associated  with  them.  There  is  no  help  for^ 
it.     Such  is  sinful  human  nature,  and  we  must  take  it  as  we  faid  it. 

*  Illud  totis  viribus  uigere,  illud  unum  inculcare,  ut  recepta? 

hactenus  fidei  communique  et  vestrEE  et  aliarum  ecclesiarum  confessio- 
ni  adhaerere  usque  velitis  omnes.  Q.uod  si  feceritis,  O  felicem  Belgi- 
cara  !  O  intemeratam  Christi  sponsam  !  O  Reuipubllcam  florentissi- 

jxiam ! Illud  vero  ut  jam  tandem  fiat,  <?/\oT/^«/Tfls  rKrv^^^siv.     Fra- 

tres  suraus ;  simus  et  collegae.  €tuid  nobis  cum  illo  infami  Remonstran- 
tium,  Contra-Remonstrantium.  Calvinianorum,  Arminianorum  titu- 
lo?  Christiani  sumus,  simus  et  is-o^-ux"^-  Unum  corpus  sumus,  simus 
et  unanimes.  Per  tremendum  illud  omnipotentis  Dei  nomen — per 
pium  blandumque  communis  matris  nostrae  gremium ;  per  vestras  ipso- 
rura  animas  ;  perque  sanctissima  Jesu  Christi  Servatoris  nostri  visce- 
ra, pacem  ambite  fratres,  pacem  inite  :  et  ita  vos  componite,  ut;  sepc- 
sito  omni  prfejudicio,  partiuraque  studio  ac  malo  alfectu,  in  eadem  om- 
nes veritate  feliciter  conspiremas. 

Ib.  Sess.  XVI. 


210 

of  joining  with  each  other  in  acts  of  pubUck 
worship,  according  to  their  respective  usages. 
Much  less  did  any  of  them  look  upon  any  other 
as  not  being  true  churches,  and  upon  their  min- 
istry and  ordinances  as  unlawful  and  invalid. 
Such  a  notion  concerning  churches  without 
Episcopal  order  and  ordination,  had  not  yet  in- 
fected the  church  of  England^  and  curdled  in  her 
breasts  the  milk  of  Christian  kindness.  Her 
representatives  at  Dordt,  explicitly  call  the  min- 
isters of  the  Dutch  church,  "  beloved  breth- 
ren and  felloiD -ministers. ^^"^ 

2.  The  views  and  feelings  expressed  by  Dr. 
Hall  corresponded  entirely  Avith  those  of  the 
Avhole  Synod  ;  for  they  call  his  discourse  "  most 
learned  and  accurate,"  and  gave  him  publick 
thanks  for  it.f  So  that,  considering  how  the  Sy- 
nod was  constituted,  it  may  be  taken  an  official 
expression  of  the  views  and  feelings  of  refornied 
Europe,  And  when  this  most  venerable  assem- 
bly, inferiour  in  learning,  talent,  holiness,  and 
dignity,  to  none  that  had  preceded  it  since  the 
great  council  of  Nice,  was  about  breaking  up  ; 
the  members  mutually  gave  each  other  the  "  right 
hand  of  brotherly  communion,"!  and  parted  w^ith 
embracings  and  tears.     Here  was  the  most  so- 

*■  In.  part  2.  p.  2^4.     t  Ib.  part  f.  p.  33.       t  l^.part  S.  p.  33^2. 


211 

lemn  formula,  (the  right  hand  of  fellowship) 
known  in  the  church  of  God  for  receiving  and 
acknowledging  each  other  as  brethren  in  Christ 
and  in  the  gos{>el  of  Christ — the  most  sacred 
pledge  of  Christian  and  ministerial  communion. 
Can  a  shadow  of  doubt  remain  after  the  testimo- 
ny of  such  a  fact  ?  Is  it  a  tolerable  question, 
whether  such  men,  or  the  ministers  and  members 
of  the  churches  they  represented,  would  sit  down 
together  at  the  Lord's  table  ? 

As  to  the  church  of  Holland^  it  is  well  known, 
that  she  practised  the  liberal  communion  of 
which  those  illustrious  deputies  sanctioned  the 
principle,  and  set  an  example.  For  her  mem- 
bers before  this  communicated  with  the  Bkow- 
MSTS,  the  English  independents  who  fled  from 
ecclesiastical  oppression  in  their  own  country ; 
although,  by  a  singular  inconsistency,  the  Brow- 
nist  teachers  would  not  consent  to  reciprocate 
the  communion  any  further  than  in  prayer  and 
hearing  the  word :  and  that  in  the  face  of  their 
own  protestation  wherein  they  say,  "  We  account 
the  reformed  churches  as  true  and  genuine ;  We 
profess  communion  with  them  in  the  sacred  things 
of  God ;  a7id,  as  much  as  in  us  lieSy  ive  cultivate 
it.^^*      An  inconsistency  which,    it    is  heartily 


*  Ecclesias  reformatas  pro  veris  et  genuiiiis  habemus ;  cum  iifdem 
in  sacris  Dei  coramunionern  profitemur;  et,  'juantuin  ia  nobis  e-t,  co- 


212 

to  be  wished,  had  stood  alone ;  and,  deeply  to 
be  regretted,  has  been  kept  in  countenance  by 
the  professions  and  practice  of  later  days :  but 
which,  at  that  time,  was  equalled  only  by  the  in- 
consistency of  the  government  of  England,  in 
supporting,  cherishing,  comforting,  honouring  the 
non-episcopal  churches  abroad  ;  and  discourag- 
ing, harrassing,  crushing  the  very  same  sort  of 
churches  at  home. 

The  church  of  Holland  was  not  only  ready  to 
communicate  in  the  sacraments  with  the  Eng- 
lish dissenters,  as  well  as  with  the  establishment, 
but  actually  appointed  one  of  the  former,  the 
learned  and  excellent  Dr.  William  x\mes,  a  pro- 
fessor of  theology  in  the  university  of  Franeker, 
The  same  honour  proffered  thirty  years  after,  i.  e. 
in  1651,  to  that  holy  man  of  God,  Samuel  Ru- 
therford, of  St.  Andreivs  in  Scotland^  when  she 
invited  him  to  the  professor's  chair  in  the  city 
of  Utrecht.*  In  fact,  the  churches  of  Holland  and 
Scotland,  like  the  reformed  churches  on  the  con- 
tinent, considered  and  treated  each  other  as  parts 
of  a  common  whole  ;  and  furnished,  by  their 
connexion  and  intercourse,  as  they  had  opportu- 


limus.—RoBiNsoN's  declaration  in  Neals*  history  of  the  Puritans. 
Vol.  I.  437,  438.  4to.  iT54. 

*  Crookshanks  History  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.    Vol.  I.  p. 
116.  Lond.  1749.  avo. 


213 

nity,  a  sample  of  that  catholick  communion  to 
which  the  obligation  is  so  clearly  asserted  in  their 
confessions. 

The  aspect  of  the  British  churches  was  much 
less  inviting.  Even  in  the  early  part  of  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth,  untender,  not  to  say  violent,  mea- 
sures were  adopted  toward  those  who  had  con- 
scientious objections  to  some  observances  in  the 
establishment.  But  still  the  great  Protestant 
principle  of  communion  was  not  renounced  ;  it 
was  not  the  nature^  but  the  application  of  that 
principle,  which  produced  so  much  scruple  on 
one  side,  and  so  much  oppression  on  the  other. 
With  all  their  coercive  zeal  toward  their  own 
dissentients,  neither  the  civil  nor  ecclesiastical 
government  of  England  thought  of  denying  the 
lawfulness  and  the  duty  of  communion  between 
the  Protestant  churches,  notwithstanding  their 
variations  from  each  other  in  smaller  things. 
This  was  sufficiently  manifest,  as  has  been  no- 
ticed, by  their  conduct  relative  to  the  Synod  of 
DordU  Their  errour  lay  in  making  matter  of 
compulsion  toward  their  own  people,  what  was 
matter  of  forbearance  toward  all  others— in  sup- 
posing that  certain  diversities  found,  by  experi- 
ence, to  be  innocent  on  the  continent,  must  ne- 
cessarily be  criminal,  if  not  fatal,  in  EnglatuL 
And  they  carried  so  far  their  passion  for  U7Uiyj  as 


214 

to  destroy  it  by  indiscreet  means  of  enforcing  it. 
Ail  this  was  an  abuse,  gross  indeed,  but  still  an 
abuse  of  a  sound  and  salutary  principle.  It  was 
reserved  for  the  times,  the  temper,  and  the  influ- 
ence of  bishop  Laud,  to  reject  the  principle  itself. 
That  able  and  intrepid,  but  fierce  and  unpitying 
prelate,  set  himself  to  pervert  the  faith  of  the 
church  of  England  ;  to  break  off  her  connexion 
with  foreign  Protestants  ;  to  corrupt  her  worship 
by  assimilating  it,  in  GYeij  possible  manner,  with 
the  Popish  ritual ;  and,  by  dint  of  power,  to  ef- 
fect an  external  uniformity  over  the  island,  at  the 
expense  of  producing  real  division,  bitter  feuds, 
publick  weakness,  and  private  misery.  The  very 
next  year  after  his  elevation  to  the  see  of  Can- 
terbury, (1634,)  Lord  Scudamore,  instead  of  go- 
ing to  the  Protestant  church  RiCharenton,  as  had 
been  the  previous  practice  of  the  English  am- 
bassadors at  the  French  courts,  "  furnished  his 
chapel  after  the  new  fashion,"  (Laiidh)  "  with 
candles  upon  the  altar,  &c. ;  and  took  care  to 
publish,  upon  all  occasions,  that  the  church  of 
Englaisd  looked  not  on  the  Huguenots  as  a  part  of 
their  communion?'''^ 

This  was  the  first  instance  in  which  one  of  the 
reformed  churches  openly  renounced  the  fellow- 


*  LorA  ClJlRENDow,  as  cited  by  Neal.     Vol.  I.  ^8^. 


215 

ship  of  another.  It  was  a  melancholy  deed,  and 
a  melancholy  day.  The  alarm  which  it  created 
among  foreign  Protestants  in  England,  and  the 
indignation  which  it  excited  on  the  continent, 
proved  how  well  established  had  been  the  doc- 
trine of  Protestant  communion,  and  how  pre- 
cious it  was  in  the  eyes  of  Protestant  churches. 
By  that  fatal  act,  England  forfeited  her  pre-emi- 
nence as  the  "  bulwark  of  the  reformation,"  and 
became  an  object  of  disgust  to  the  foreign  church- 
es ;  insomuch,  that  in  her  subsequent  tribula- 
tions, she  could  scarcely  command  their  pity: 
whereas,  before  this  infatuated  act  of  selfishness 
and  schism,  she  held  the  first  rank  in  their  re- 
spect and  affection. 

To  those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  history 
of  this  disastrous  period,  it  would  be  superfluous 
to  detail  the  mercies  of  Laudj  and  the  mysteries 
of  the  Star-chamber,  To  those  who  have  not 
such  an  acquaintance,  our  limits  do  not  allow  us 
to  present  even  an  imperfect  sketch  :  and  per- 
haps the  nature  of  this  volume  forbids  the  at- 
tempt. Suffice  it  to  observe,  that  the  contests  in 
the  church  of  England  between  the  high-hand- 
ed conformists  and  their  demurring  brethren,  fur- 
nished proof,  and  not  refutation,  of  the  doctrine 
here  advanced  in  favour  of  catholic  communion. 
No  whim,  nor  abuse,  nor  corruption,  which  ihey 

28 


216 

were  not  required  to  approve^  severed  the  Puri- 
tans from  the  Established  Church.  They  grieved, 
they  mourned,  they  expostulated,  about  things 
which  afflicted  their  consciences ;  but  they 
thought  not  of  separation.  Had  they  been  al- 
lowed to  exonerate  themselves  from  the  charge 
of  countenancing  what,  in  all  sincerity,  they  dis- 
allowed ;  or,  had  they  not  been  commanded  to 
belie  their  conviction  by  an  explicit  approbation 
of  what  they  abhorred,  the  name  of  dissenters 
from  the  church  of  England  had  never  been 
known.  Un-episcopal  in  their  judgment  they 
certainly  were  ;  as  were  all  the  continental  Pro- 
testants, and  all  the  fathers  of  the  British  refor- 
mation. They  disliked,  they  loathed, certain  ex- 
ieriour  observances  ;  but  still,  had  they  been  per- 
mitted to  dislike  and  to  loathe  without  exciting 
public  disturbance^ — had  they  not  been  required 
to  deny  what  they  believed  to  be  truth,  and  to 
profess  what  they  believed  to  be  falsehood — had 
not  the  price  of  their  peace  in  the  establishment 
been  rated  so  high  as  the  perjury  of  their  souls 
before  God,  they  had  never  been  separated  from 
the  church  of  England.  As  it  was,  they  did  not 
retire^  they  were  driven  from  her  bosom  :  and 
they  have  thus  left  upon  record  their  testimony 
of  martyrdom  to  the  sacredness  of  that  com- 
munion which  belongs  to  the  church  of  God, 


217 

and  to  the  criminality  of  dividing  it  upon  slight 
pretexts.  The  same  thing  may  be  said  of  the 
rent  begun  in  1732,  in  the  church  of  Scotland. 
The  Seceders  did  not  voluntarily  ivithdraw^  they 
were  expelled.  Had  the  Commission  of  the  Ge- 
neral Assembly,  and  the  General  Assembly  itself 
known  their  own  interests — had  they  listened 
more  to  the  counsels  of  Christian  peace  than  to 
the  pride  of  a  secular  establishment,  the  church 
of  Scotland  had  been  "  one  and  indivisible." 
But,  like  England  with  her  Laud  and  her  Star- 
ehamber^  she  chose  to  be  ferocious  :  and  she 
broke  the  golden  chain  of  her  unity,  perhaps 
never  to  be  repaired  till  those  days  of  the  "  Son 
of  man"  which,  according  to  his  word,  we  con- 
fidently expect.  In  the  mean  time  has  happened 
what  the  nature  of  human  passions  might  fore- 
warn us  to  anticipate :  grievance  has  been  ac- 
cumulated upon  grievance,  and  complaint  upon 
complaint.  The  point  of  honour  with  the  devo- 
tees of  the  establishment  is  to  heap  contempt  on 
the  separatists  ;  and,  with  the  devotees  of  sepa- 
ration, to  degrade  the  establishment.  And  thus, 
while  "high  church,"  on  both  sides  of  the  Tweed. 
deals  out  its  proscriptions  more  in  the  spirit  of 
the  world  than  in  the  bowels  of  Christ,  the  com- 
pliment is  returned  by  their  antagonists  with 
bearty  good  will.     Many  things  are  noui  alleged 


218 

to  justify  dissent  from  the  church  of  England^ 
and  secession  from  the  church  of  Scotland^ 
which,  we  know^  were  not  among  the  original 
causes  of  disunion.  And  so  it  is  with  all  parties 
after  their  disagreement  has  become  inveterate. 
This  is  humiliating,  but  it  is  true.  And  the  arm 
of  Truth  must  not  be  unnerved,  light  her  blow 
where  it  maj. 

To  return.  The  church  of  England  continued 
in  this  uncomfortable  state.  Power  persecuting 
right,  and  right  remonstrating  to  power — the  se- 
cular hierarchy  commanding,  and  the  scriptural 
conscience  disobeying  and  suffering,  till  that 
memorable  epoch  in  the  reign  of  Charles  !. — 
the  meeting  of  the  Assembly  of  divines  at  West- 
minster ^  in  1643. 

This  Assembly  was  called  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  reforming  more  perfectly  "  the  discipline, 
liturgy,  and  government  of  the  church,"  so  that 
"  such  a  government  might  be  settled  in  the 
church  as  should  be  most  agreeable  to  God's 
holy  word,  and  most  apt  to  procure  and  preserve 
the  peace  of  the  church  at  home,  and  nearer 
agreement  with  the  church  of  Scotland^  and  other 
reformed  churches  abroad." 

The  assembly  was  originally  composed  of 
Presbyterians,  Episcopalians,  and  Independents  ; 
mth  commissioners,  both  lay  and  clerical,  from 


219 

the  church  of  Scotland.  The  Episcopal  divines 
withdrew  at  an  early  period  of  their  discussions, 
viz.  before  the  introduction  of  the  "  Solemn 
league  and  covenant ^^'^'^  and  the  number  of  Inde- 
pendents w^as  but  small  ;t  so  that  the  business  of 
the  assembly  was  managed  principally  by  the 
Presbyterians. 

On  the  form  of  church-government  there  was 
much  difference  of  judgment,  long  and  Avarm 
debate,  and  great  embarrassment. 

In  the  body  of  Christian  doctrine  there  was  al- 
most a  perfect  harmony.  A  few  members  ob- 
jected to  "  some  expressions  relating  to  reproba- 
tion^ to  the  imputation  of  the  active  as  well  as  pas- 
sive obedience  of  Christ ;  and  to  several  passages 
in  the  chapters  of  liberty  of  conscience,  and 
church  discipline ;  but  the  confession,  as  far  as  it 
related  to  articles  of  faith,  passed  the  Assembly 
and  Parliament  by  a  very  great  majority  ;"  and 
w^as,  without  exception,  adopted  by  the  church  of 
Scotland.!  The  Independents,  when  they  form- 
ed themselves  into  a  separate  body,  thirteen 
years  afterwards,  i.  e.  in  1658,  published  a  con- 
fession of  faith,  called  the  Savoy  confession,  which, 
for  substance,  is  the  same  as  the  Assembly's. 
^'  They  have  omitted  all  those  chapters  in  the 

*  Neale,  II.  68.         t  Neale  ^ays,  ■'  not  above  six  "  Vol,  II.  p  44. 
t  U,  258 


*• 


220 

Assembly's  confession  which  relate  to  discipline ; 
as  the  30th  and  31  st,  with  part  of  the  20th  and 
24th,  relating  to  the  power  of  Syjicds^  councils, 
church  censures,  marriage  a7id  divorce,  and  the 
power  of  the  civil  magistrate  in  matters  of  religion.^^ 
But  "  upon  the  whole,  the  difference  between 
these  two  confessions  in  point  of  doctrine  is  so 
small,  that  the  modern  Independents  have,  in  a 
manner,  laid  aside  the  use  of  it,"  (their  own,) 
"  in  their  families,  and  agreed  with  the  Presbyte- 
rians in  the  use  of  the  iVssembly's  catechism."^ 
In  the  result,  therefore,  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly's  deUberation — an  assembly  not  sur- 
passed even  by  the  Synod  of  Dordt,  or  the  coun- 
cil of  Nice — we  have  the  doctrinal  judgment  of  at 
least  the  £w^/i5/i  Presbyterians  andlndependentSj 
and  of  the  whole  church  of  Scotland.  That  judg- 
ment in  the  article  of  church-communion  is  the 
more  important,  as  the  churches  immediately 
concerned  in  the  present  inquiry  have  sprung 
from  them  ;  have  received,  all  of  them  the  doc- 
trine, many  of  them  the  government,  discipline, 
and  worship,  settled  by  that  most  venerable  as- 
sembly. So  that  when  we  have  the  doctrine  of 
the  Westminster  confession  of  faith  on  the  arti- 
cle of  communion,  we  have  the  faith  avowed  at 

*  tb.:)07. 


221 

this  moment  of  the  church  of  Scotland — of  both 
branches  of  the  secession  in  that  country  and 
Ireland — of  the   Reformed   Presbytery  ;  of  the 
Synod  of  Relief  in  Scotland — of  a  large  body  of 
English  Independents — and  of  all,  or  nearly  all, 
the  American  churches  which  have  descended 
from  them  :  that  is,  we  have  the  professed  faith 
of  all  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  Scotland,  Ire- 
land, and  Afuerica  (the  Associate  Reformed  Church 
being  one,) — and  of  the  body  of  English  and 
American  Independents.     When  we  shall  have 
settled  the  doctrine  of  communion,  as  taught  in 
the  Westminster  confession,  we  shall  also  have 
settled  the  principle  which  these  churches,  at 
least  the  Presbyterian  part  of  them,  have  so- 
lemnly adopted  and  promised  to  observe,  as  the 
rule  of  their  ecclesiastical  conduct.     With  this 
general  clue  let  us  go  to   the  "  Confession  of 
faith."     The  26th  chapter  is  entitled: 

"  0/*  COMMUNION    OF    SAINTS'." 

the  doctrine  concerning  which  it  lays  down  in 
the  following  terms : 

"  All  saints  that  are  united  to  Jesus  Christ 
their  head,  by  his  Spirit  and  by  faith,  have  fel- 
lowship with  him  in  his  graces,  sufferings,  death, 
resurrection,  and  glory.  And,  being  united  to 
one  another  in  lovCj  they  have  communion  in 


222 

each  other's  gilts  and  graces,  and  are  obliged  to 
the  performance  of  such  duties,  pubUck  and  pri- 
vate, as  do  conduce  to  their  mutual  good,  both 
in  the  inward  and  outward  man." 

^'  II.  Saints  by  profession  are  bound  to  main- 
tain an  holy  fellowship  and  communion  in  the 
worship  of  God,  and  in  performing  such  other 
spiritual  services  as  tend  to  their  mutual  edifica- 
tion :  as  also  in  relieving  each  other  in  outward 
things,  according  to  their  several  abilities  and 
necessities.  Which  communion,  as  God  offer- 
eth  opportunity,  is  to  be  extended  unto  all  those 
who  in  every  place  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus." 

This  latter  section  describes,  apparently,  the 
communion  which  ought  to  subsist  between  pro- 
fessed Christians  in  their  relation  to  each  other  as 
visible  members  of  the  church  of  God  ;  assert- 
ing their  joint  title  to,  and  interest  in,  all  the  pri- 
vileges of  his  house,  and  their  duty  to  partici- 
pate therein  with  each  other,  as  they  have  op- 
portunity, upon  the  single  ground  of  their  being 
followers  of  the  Lord  Jesus. 

Let  us  view  it  a  little  more  closely. 

The  parties  are  "saints  by  profession:"  i.  e. 
those  who  make  a  credible  profession  of  religion 
— whom,  according  to  the  rules  of  scriptural 
judgment,  we  are  to  acknowledge  as  fellow- 
christians. 


223 

The  communion  which  they  are  to  cherish 
with  each  other  is  defined  in  its  nature,  its  extent, 
and  in  the  principle  of  its  application.  Its  nature 
is  threefold.     It  consists  : 

1.  \n  social  worship. 

They  are  partners  with  each  other  in  all  that 
is  comprehended  under  "  the  worship  of  God:" 
i.  e.  his  instituted  ordinances  in  his  church. 

This  partnership  is  to  be  avowed  and  expressed 
by  open  acts  of  mutual  recognition — they  are  "^o 
maintain  an  holy  fellowship  and  communion  in  the 
ivorship  of  God,^^ 

Their  recognition  of  each  other  is  not  a  matter 
of  choice  or  discretion,  which  they  may  do,  or 
omit,  as  they  please.  It  is  a  duty  which  they  are 
not  at  liberty  to  forego — an  imperative  obligation 
upon  their  consciences — they  are  "  bound^^  to 
maintain  this  communion. 

2.  In  acts  of  religious  good-will,  which,  though 
they  fall  not  directly  under  the  "  worship  of  God," 
are  yet  "  such  spiritual  services  as  tend  to  their 
mutual  edification." 

3.  "  In  relieving  each  other  in  outward  things 
according  to  their  several  abilities  and  necessi- 
ties." 

As  to  the  extent  of  this  communion  in  all  its 
branches — it  is  to  embrace  Christians  as  such  : 

29 


224 

1.  Of  every  denomination — even  "allvrho  call 
iipon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus." 

2.  Of  every  country  and  clime — even  all  who 
"  in  every  place"  call  upon  him. 

The  application  of  this  doctrine  is  to  be  regu- 
lated by  providential  occurrences  : — "  as  God 
ofFereth  opportunity."  When  you  do  not  force  an 
occasion  by  the  neglect  of  more  pressing  duties  f 
but  when  in  his  providence  he  fairly  puts  it  in 
your  way,  you  are  not  to  shun,  but  thankfully  to 
accept  such  an  "  opportunity"  of  testifying  your 
love  to  his  people  by  joining  with  them  in  the 
ordinances  dispensed  among  them,  or  welcoming 
them  to  the  ordinances  dispensed  among  your- 
selves. 

This  seems  to  be  a  simple  interpretation  of  the 
article  before  us.  Such  an  one  as  a  man  of  plain 
sense  and  upright  heart,  without  any  previous 
bias,  and  regarding  only  the  terms  in  which  it  is 
couched,  would  put  upon  it.  And  if  such  is,  in- 
deed, its  meaning,  there  can  be  no  further  debate. 
The  churches  concerned  have  decided,  by  their 
own  publick  confession,  in  favour  of  a  commu- 
nion as  catholick  and  generous  as  that  of  the 
Apostolick  and  Primitive  and  Protestant  ages :  and 
nothing  remains  for  them  but  to  show,  by  their 
example,  that  they  believe  their  own  doctrine — 
that  the  profession  \vhich  they  are  in  the  habit  of 


225 

making  to  God  and  to  man,  is  a  fair  exhibition  of 
their  principles. 

But  the  point  will  not  be  so  easily  yielded. 
The  respected  brethren  and  venerable  fathers 
with  whom  this  plea  remonstrates,  make  a  dis- 
tinction which  they  think  clears  them  from  the 
charge  of  inconsistency,  and  conciliates  their  con- 
tracted communion  with  their  adherence  to  the 
Westminster  confession.  They  distinguish  be- 
tween church- communion  and  the  communion  of 
saints;  or,  as  they  sometimes  express  it,  Christian 
communion.  By  the  first,  viz.  church- communion^ 
they  understand  communion  with  a  church  in  her 
social  character,  as  organized  under  a  particular 
form  of  doctrine,  government,  and  worship.  By 
the  second,  viz.  the  communion  of  saints  or  Chris- 
tian communion^  they  understand  that  communion 
which  subsists  between  Christians  as  individuals 
simply,  without  reference  to  their  church-connex- 
ion  at  all.  And  some  have  even  limited  this  com- 
munion, at  least  in  the  extent  of  the  confession 
in  the  article  cited  above,  to  '^ministering  with 
our  substance,  by  communications  of  it  to  supply 
the  necessities  of  the  saints,  or,  in  doing  other 
offices  of  kindness :"  which  they  suppose,  -'is  fully 
evident  from  the  scriptures  quoted  by  the  vene- 
rable assembly  at  Westminster  in  support  of  that 


226 

article."*  The  confession  is  therefore  considered 
not  as  treating  of  communion  with  a  church  at  all, 
but  simply  of  that  brotherly  love  which  should 
adorn  the  private  intercourse  of  those  who  are 
called  by  the  name  of  Christ. 

If  the  distinction  here  stated,  and  as  stated,  be 
sound,  and  the  interpretation  depending  upon 
it  genuine,  the  Westminster  confession  must 
doubtless  be  expunged  from  our  roll  of  witnesses. 
But  if  it  should  prove  to  be  altogether  untenable, 
and  the  interpretation  founded  upon  it  to  be  in 
direct  repugnance  to  the  article  Avhich  it  is -em- 
ployed to  explain,  the  refuge  of  our  opposing 
brethren  will  be  swept  away. 

In  combatting  their  distinction,  which  he  holds 
to  be  erroneous  and  hurtful,  the  authour  trusts  to 
their  candour  for  acquitting  him  from  the  impu« 
tation  of  disrespect.  He  feels  both  regret  and 
grief  at  the  necessity  imposed  on  him,  of  differing 
from  brethren  whom  he  esteems  and  loves,  with 
whom  he  has  taken,  and  hopes  yet  to  take  "  sweet 
counsel  together,  and  to  go  to  the  house  of  God  in 
company" — from  fathers  whose  shoe's  latchet  he 
is  scarce  worthy  to  unloose— from  churches  w^hich 
have  been  and  are  valiant  for  the  truth,  and  which 


*  Re-exhibition  of  the  Testimony  hy  the  (Burgher)  AesG- 
fjATE  Synqd,  1T78.     Page  1T8,  note  *. 


227 

liave  distinguished  themselves  for  their  fidehty  to 
the  testimony  of  Jesus.  It  was  in  their  own 
school,  by  imbibing  their  own  spirit,  that  he  first 
learned  to  "  call  no  man  master  upon  earth  ;"  and 
he  would  not  pay  them  so  miserable  a  compli- 
ment as  to  refrain  from  pointing  out  their  mistake, 
from  an  unmanly  fear  of  coming  short  in  the  du- 
ties of  tenderness  and  respect.  The  weight  of 
their  names,  the  strength  of  their  habits,  and  the 
importance  which  they  attach  to  the  distinction 
before  us,  not  only  justify,  but  demand  a  close  and 
full  investigation. 

It  must  strike  every  thinking  reader  as  some- 
what extraordinary,  that  the  communion  of  a 
church  made  up  of  visible  saints — of  Christians, 
should  not  be  the  communion  of  saints,  nor  Chris- 
tian communion!  If  the  communion  which,  in 
publick  worship,  saints  hold  with  saints,  as  such, 
is  not  "communion  of  saints" — which  Christians 
there  hold  with  Christians,  is  not  "  Christian  com- 
munion," what  is  it  ?  Do  the  Christians  disappear 
when  the  church  assembles  ?  Do  the  saints  become 
unsainted  the  moment  they  sit  down  at  the  Lord's 
table ;  so  that  their  communion  in  his  body  and 
blood  is  not  the  communion  of  saints,  nor  at  all 
signified  by  that  expression  ?  To  say  the  least, 
here  is  a  smack  o^  Babel:  a  stransre  confusion  of 
human  speech !  the  words  certainly  do  not  sound 


22« 

so:  nor  is  it  conceivable  how  such  a  construc- 
tion of  them  should  suggest  itself  to  any  man's 
mind,  unless  he  had  been  reduced  to  great  straits 
by  the  pressure  of  some  importunate  argument; 
and  could  fall  upon  no  other  means  to  extricate 
himself. 

Nor  is  it  less  extraordinary,  that  an  instrument 
prepared,  like  the  confession  of  faith,  with  the 
most  cautious  deliberation ;  an  instrument  re- 
markable, above  all  other  uninspired  composi- 
tions, for  denseness  and  perspicuity  ;  for  preci- 
sion and  amplitude,  should  treat  professedly  of  the 
church  of  God ;  of  her  ministry,  her  ordinances^ 
her  worship — and  contain  not  one  syllable  on  that 
momentous  topic,  her  communion!  Should  be  ex- 
plicit and  minute  on  the  private  communion  of 
her  members,  and  silent  as  death  about  their /?m6- 
lick  fellowship!  That  the  very  framers  of  this  in- 
strument should  write  letters  full  of  affection  to 
foreign  Protestant  churches;  and  should  avoid, 
studiQudy  avoid,  in  their  doctrine  concerning 
the  catholick  church,  every  thing  which  might 
inform  their  correspondents  in  what  light  they 
were  to  be  viewed — whether  as  fellow-eom- 
municants  in  their  Christian  privileges,  or  as  a 
profane  refuse  of  heathen  men  and  publicans! 
It  is  absolutely  incredible!  Yet  all  this  have  they 
done,  or  neglected  to  do,  if  the  chapter  on  the 


229 

"  communion  of  saints,"  is  rightly  interpreted  of 
Christian,  to  the  exclusion  of  church-communion. 
Such  an  idea  is  the  more  inadmissible,  as  all  the 
churches  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  organized 
under  the  Westminster  confession,  are  in  the  same 
predicament.  There  is  not  one  of  them  whose 
authentick,  standard  confession  of  their  faith  res- 
pecting the  church  of  God,  so  much  as  tells  the 
other  churches  whether  they  even  own  them  as 
brethren  in  the  Lord  or  not !  There  is  something 
wrong  here  :  and  it  will  be  of  no  small  service  to 
the  character  of  the  churches  of  the  Westminster 
confession,  to  set  it  right.  For  this  end  it  will  be 
proper, 

1.  To  ascertain  the  meaning  of  the  phrase, 
"  Communion  of  saint s,"^"^ 

2.  To  examine  the  internal  evidence  of  the  con- 
fession itself,  coupled  with  the  larger  and  shorter 
Catechisms,  which  are  only  different  forms  of  the 
same  body  of  general  doctrine. 

3.  To  compare  these  results  with  the  views  of 
church-communion  which  are  known  to  have  pre- 
vailed about  the  period  of  which  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly  is  the  most  conspicuous  incident. 

1.  For  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  the  phrase 
"  communion  of  saints,"  let  it  be  remembered, 
that  at  the  time  of  forming  the  Westminster  con- 
fession it  had  been  of  long  use  in  the  church  of 


230 

God :  so  that  it  had  become  familiar  as  a  tech- 
nical expression ;  and  may,  therefore,  be  taken 
only  in  its  known  and  established  sense.  It  pass- 
ed into  the  language  of  the  churches  from  that 
brief  summary  of  Christian  doctrine,  called  the 
"  Apostles'  creed."  And  as  the  Westminster  di- 
vines have  annexed  that  summary  to  their  own 
more  enlarged  work,  they  have  taught  us  that  they 
understood  the  phrase  '^communion  of  saints"  in 
the  sense  which  is  affixed  to  it  by  the  Apostles' 
creed,  and  which  had  been  received  without  con- 
tradiction  or  variance  down  to  their  own  day. 

That  little  compend  was  current  in  the  Chris- 
tian world  without  the  clause  "  communion  of 
saints,"  until  the  end  of  the  fourth,  or  beginning 
of  the  fifth  century.  It  was  gradually,  but  very 
cautiously  and  sparingly,  enlarged,  as  occasion  re- 
quired. And  it  was  an  occasion  of  some  deep 
and  universal  interest  which  could  avail  for  intro- 
ducing  a  new  clause  into  a  formula  of  such  high 
authority,  such  boundless  adoption,  and  such  ex- 
treme brevity.  Some  point  of  primary  magni- 
tude in  the  faith  of  the  whole  Christian  world,  and 
which  it  was  deemed  necessary  to  maintain  by  a 
corresponding  testimony,  must  have  been  assail- 
ed— some  errour  calculated  to  alarm  the  church 
"from  the  one  end  of  heaven  even  to  the  other  end 
of  heaven,"  must  have  been  broached,  to  cause 


231 

the  insertion  of  a  new  member  into  that  minia- 
ture body  of  doctrine  which  contained  the  radical 
faith  of  all  believers  from  the  rising  to  the  setting 
sun.  What  was  it?  Amidst  all  the  heresies 
which  infested  the  church  for  four  hundred  years, 
had  any  one  denied  the  obligation  upon  Chris- 
tians in  their  private  capacity  to  cultivate  brotherly 
kindness  ? — to  intermingle  their  Christian  affec- 
tions?— to  abound  in  deeds  of  munificence  for  each 
other's  comfort,  and  for  the  furtherance  of  the 
gospel  ?  *  Was  there  any  doubt  upon  this  head? 
And  can  it  be  imagined  that  the  publick  creed, 
which  Christians  held  sacred,  was  enlarged  for  the 
purpose  of  asserting  what  nobody  disputed?  This 
will  not  bear  inquiry. 

*  When  the  coldness  and  niggardliness  of  Christians  among  us  to- 
ward the  most  glorious  objects  of  pious  effort,  are  compared  with  the 
ardour  and  bounty  of  the  primitive  believers,  one  cannot  help  smiling, 
though  in  bitterness,  at  Cyprian's  complaint,  that  in  his  day,  A.  D. 
251,  Christians  had  so  far  degenerated  from  their  first  love,  as  not  to 
give  the  tenth  part  of  their  substance  to  religious  uses! !!  Nunc,  says 
he,  de  patrimonio  nee  decimas  daraus!  !  (De  unit :  eccks :  p.  120.)  The 
writer  knows  a  congregation  of  very  decent  professors,  in  a  very  snug 
way  of  living,  who  some  years  since  gave,  among  them  all,  fifty  dol- 
lars to  a  seminary  out  of  which  the  word  of  the  gospel  is  expected  to 
go  forth  to  feed  their  own  children  with  the  "  bread  of  God;"  and  the 
last  account  of  them  is,  that  "  they  have  not  yet  got  over  this  Her- 
culean exertion  !"  He  mourns  to  add,  that  there  are  others,  and  they 
not  poor,  who  §,\yenothing,  or  next  to  nothing;  and  yet  claim  a  full  and 
even  preponderating  share  of  the  fruits  for  which  they  have  not  labour- 
ed, and  which  have  been  raised  by  men  more  indigent  than  themselves. 
O  Saviour,  do  Uiese  people  love  thee?  Shame,  where  is  thy  blush! 

SO 


232 

The  troubles  created  by  the  Donatists  began 
near  the  commencement  of  the  fourth  centur^j 
and  raged  with  violence  for  a  long  series  of  years. 
Their  schism,  as  was  shown  above,  consisted  pre- 
cisely in  their  breaking  off  from  the  Catholick 
church,  and  refusing  to  hold  communion  with 
churches  that  were  not  of  their  own  body.  Prior 
to  this  event  the  clause  under  discussion  was  not 
in  the  Apostles'  creed ;  nor  is  it  to  be  found  in  any 
of  the  editions  of  that  instrument  which  have 
been  preserved  in  writings  of  an  earlier  date.  The 
creed  simply  said,  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholick 
churchj  the  forgiveness  of  siris,  &c.  But  after  the 
schism  of  the  Donatists,  in  the  time  of  Augustin 
their  great  antagonist,  it  appears  with  "the  commu- 
nion of  saints^"^^  between  these  two  clauses ;  and 
reads,  "  /  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholick  church,  the 
COMMUNION  OF  SAINTS,  the  forgivcncss  ofsinSj'^^  &c. 

The  fact  is  conclusive.  We  have  here  the 
reason  and  origin  of  the  phrase.  It  was  to  main- 
tain the  principle  of  the  union  and  communion  of 
the  Catholick  church,  against  the  schismatical 
doctrine  and  conduct  of  the  Donatists;  and  so  it 
is  paraphrased  by  its  learned  historian  and  com- 
mentator. Sir  Peter  King. 

"The  term  Saints j^^  says  he,  " being  explained, 
it  will  not  be  difficult  to  apprehend  the  meaning 
of  the  other  term  Communion ;  which  naturally 


2S3 

appears  to  be  this ;  that  there  is,  and  ought  to  be, 
a  mutual  intercourse  and  society,  fellowship  and 
communion,  in  all  usual  and  regular  ways,  be- 
tween the  several  respective  churches  and  con- 
gregations of  Christians  and  believers,  whereby 
they  declare  unto  the  whole  world,  that  although 
both  necessity  and  convenience  oblige  them  to 
assemble  in  distinct  places,  and  compose  differ- 
ent societies,  yet,  nevertheless,  they  are  all  mem- 
bers of  one  and  the  same  body  of  which  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  head :  that  they  are  all  guided  by 
the  same  spirit,  communicate  in  the  same  institu- 
tions, and  are  governed  by  the  same  general  rules ; 
so  that  whatsoever  is  regularly  performed  and  de- 
termined in  one  congregation,  is  assented  to  by 
all  others ;  and  whosoever  is  received  to  communion 
in  one  churchy  is  freely  admitted  into  any  other. '''^  * 
It  is,  therefore,  clear  that  the  phrase  "  commu- 
nion of  saints,''  was,  originally,  so  far  from  signi- 
fying what  is  now  called  "  Christian  communion" 
in  opposition  to  "c/iwrc/i-communion,"  that  it  sig- 
nified exactly,  or  nearly,  the  reverse :  i.  e.  it  not 
only  comprehended,  but  strictly  and  properly  ex- 
pressed, and  was  put  into  the  creed  for  the  very 
purpose  of  expressing,  church-communion.  And 
although  it  is  couched  in  terms  which  fairly  em- 

*  King's  Ctilkal  History  of  the  Apostles^  Creed,  p.  342,  343,  London. 
1719.  8vo. 


234 

brace  the  whole  fellowship  of  believers,  so  as  to 
allow  that  latitude  of  exposition  which  it  receives 
in  the  Westminster  confession;  yet  its  immediate, 
primary,  and  chief,  if  not  sole  intention,  was  to 
assert  the  obligation  upon  all  the  churches  of  God 
throughout  the  world,  to  commune  with  each 
other  in  the  most  solemn  offices  of  religion,  as 
his  providence  should  furnish  them  with  oppor- 
tunities. 

In  this  reigning  sense  was  it  handed  down  to 
posterity,  and  understood  at  the  reformation  more 
than  eleven  centuries  after  its  adoption. 

The  Helvetic  confession 

Explains  the  church  to  be  "  a  company  of  be- 
lievers called  or  collected  outof  the  world  ;  adding, 
"  I  mean  a  communion  of  all  the  saints ;  viz.  of 
them  who  really  know  the  true  God,  in  Christ  the 
Saviour,  by  his  word  and  spirit,  who  worship  him 
aright ;  finally,  who  by  faith  participate  in  all  the 
benefits  which  are  freely  offered  to  them  through 
Christ.  All  these  are  citizens  of  one  city,  living 
under  the  same  Lord,  and  the  same  laws,  in  the 
same  participation  of  all  good  things.  For  so  the 
Apostle  has  called  them ;  (fellow-citizens  with  the 
saints  and  of  the  household  of  God  :)  Bestowing 
the   appellation  of  ^  saints^   upon  believers  on 


■;& 


235 

earth,  "who  are  sanctified  by  the  blood  of  the  son 
of  God.  Eph.  2.  1.  Cor.  6.  Of  ivhoin  is  by  all 
means  to  be  understood  that  article  of  the  creed,  I 
believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  churchy  the  comiviu- 

.  NION  OF  SAINTS."* 

Here  the  "  communion  of  saints"  is  pronounced 
to  be  the  same,  as  the  "  holy  catholick  church  ;" 
so  that  whatever  the  communion  is,  it  is  church- 
communion.  Nor  can  this  be  evaded  by  mging 
that  the  confession  has  restricted  the  definition  of 
the  church  to  true  believers.  It  has  so :  but  then 
it  is  of  believers  as  they  jjrqfess  Christ,  and  are 
openly  on  his  side,  forming,  throughout  the  world, 
one  great  society  organized  under  his  laws.  It 
considers  real  Christians  to  be,  strictly  speaking, 
the  church.  But  men  cannot  see  into  each  other's 
hearts.     There  is  no  other  way  of  our  knowing 


*  Q,uando  autem  Deus  ab  initio  salvos  voluit  fieri  homines,  et  ad  ag- 

nitionem  veritatis  venire,  oportet  omnino  semper  fuisse,  nunc  esse,  et 

.ad  finem  secuH  futuram  esse  Eccle-iam:  i.  e.  e  mundo  evocatum  vel  col- 

lectum  ccetum  fidelium  ;  Sanctorum,  inquaii-,  omnium  communionem ; 

eorum  videlicet,  qui  Deum  verum  in  Christo  Servatore  per  verbum  et 

Spiritum  Sanctum  verecolunt;  denique  omnibus  bonis  per  Christum 

gratuito  oblatis  fide  participant.     Sunt  isti  omnes  unius  civitatis  cives, 

viventes  sub  eodem  Domino,  sub  iisdera  legibu?,  in  eadem  omnium  bo- 

Borum  participatione.     Sic  enim  hos  concives  Sanctorum  et  doraesticos 

Dei  appellavit  Apostolus:  Sanctos  appellans  fideles  in  terris,  sanguine 

Filii  Dei  sanctificatos.  Eph.  2.  1.  Cor,  6.  De  quibus  omnino  intelli- 

g-endus  est  symboli  articulus,  "  Credo  sanctam  Ecclesiam  catholicam, 

sanctorum  communionem," 

Ap,  Sxntag.  co3f«.  part  1.  p.  50. 


236 

who  are  believers  but  by  the  profession  of  their 
faith  with  a  corresponding  behaviour.  The  con- 
fession proceeds  upon  this  fundamental  rule  of 
society,  civil  and  sacred,  that,  before  the  tribunal 
of  human  judgment,  a  man  is  what  he  appears  to 
be.  It  speaks,  therefore,  of  the  church  of  be- 
lievers, as  indicated  by  their  visible  profession, 
walk,  and  order,  in  the  gospel.  In  no  other  way 
can  she  be  known  as  a  militant  church — in  no 
other  way  can  tares  be  mixed  with  her  wheat — 
in  no  other  way  can  she  have  "  a  great  many 
particular  churches  upon  earth,  all  referrible  to 
the  true  Catholick  church" — in  no  other  way 
could  she  "  have  her  institutions^  and  be  regulated 
in  one  form  among  the  Patriarchs  before  the  law 
— in  another,  by  the  law  under  Moses — and  in  a 
third,  by  Christ  through  the  gospel ;"  all  which 
this  same  article  most  fully  maintains. 

To  the  same  purport,  at  a  still  earlier  period, 
speaks 

T/ie  Confession  o/*Basil: 

^'  We  believe  in  the  holy  Christian  church,  i.  e. 
the  communion  of  saints;  the  congregation  of  the 
faithftil  in  spirit,  which  is  holy,  and  the  spouse 
of  Christ.  In  which  all  those  are  citizens  who  con- 
fess that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  lamb  of  God 
which  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world  ;  and 


257 

f\'ho  demonstrate  that  faith  of  theirs  by  works  of 
love."  * 

The  Strasburg  Confession  : 

"  ^ince  the  Saviour  reigns  truly,  in  these,"  (the 
children  of  God)  "  they  are  properly  called  ^  his 
church,'  and,  ^the  communion,'  i.  e.  the  society  of 
saints,  as  the  term  ^  church'  is  explained  in  the 
Apostles'  creed."  t 

The  BoHCEMic  confession: 

"  We  are  most  thoroughly  persuaded,  by  clear 
mdications  from  the  vv^ord  of  God,  that  our  minis- 
ters who  do  not  overleap  the  bounds  of  evange- 
lical doctrine,  are  addicted  to  no  heresies ;  but 
are  tnie  ministers  of  Christ,  and  in  Christ's  stead ; 
and  are  to  be  obeyed,  by  the  commandment  of 
truth  itself  Wherefore  it  were  most  unlawful  to 
withhold  the  communion  of  saints  with  them ;  es- 
pecially as  we  are  bound  thereto  by  this  very  ar- 


*  Credimus  sanctam  Christianam  Ecclesiam,  id  est,  communionem 
sanctorum,  congregationem  fidelium  in  spiritu,  quae  sancta  et  sponsa 
Christi  est :  In  qua  omnes  illi  cives  sunt  qui  confitentur  Jesum  esse 
Christum,  agnum  Dei  tollentem  peccata  mundi;  atqueeandem  fidem 
per  opera  charitatis  demonstrant.  In.  p.  94. 

t  In  his  cum  vere  regnet  Servator,  proprie  ejus  ecclesia  et  sanctorum 
Koivmict^  it  est  societas ;  ut  in  symbolo  Apostolorum  vocabulum  "  Ee- 
clesise"  expositum  est,  nominantur.  Ib.  p,  238. 


238 

tide  of  the  apostles'  creed ;  /  believe  in  the  holy 
Catholick  churchy  tha  communion  of  saints. 


?)* 


Calvin, 

Who  is  more  remarkable  for  nothing  than  for 
his  decision — who  never  trims,  nor  Ruffles,  nor 
thinks  by  halves,  has  founded  his  whole  doctrine 
of  church- communion  upon  this  very  article.  And 
in  his  exposition  of  the  words  "  communion  of 
saints"  thus  expresses  himself. 

"  This  article  of  the  creed  has  also  some  res- 
pect to  the  external  church  ;  that  every  one  of  us 
may  keep  himself  in  brotherly  concord  with  all 
the  children  of  God ;  may  yield  to  the  church 
her  just  authority  ;  in  a  word,  may  conduct  him- 
self as  a  sheep  of  the  flock.  And,  therefore,  there  is 
added,  the  communion  of  saints — because  it  ex- 
cellently expresses  the  quality  of  the  church :  as  if 
it  had  been  said,  the  saints  are  gathered  into  the 
fellowship  of  Christ  upon  this  condition,  that  they 


*  Persuasissiraum  itaque  nobis  est,  hoc  ipsum  verbo  Dei  ut  Lydio  la- 
pidc  indicante,  sacerdotes  nostros,  cutn  septa  ipsa  Evangelicaedoctrinae 
non  trausiliant,  nullos  heeresibus  addictos,  sed  ininistros  Cbristi  ac  ve- 
ros  vicarios  esse ;  quibus  parendum  esse  ipsa  Veritas  monet  dictatque. 
Q,uo  eerie  minus  fas  est,  at  cum  hi?  sanctorum  communio  detrectetur 
haberi;  praesertim  astringen'e  nos  ad  hoc  ipso  Symboli  Apostolici  ar- 
ticulo,  *'  Credo  sanctani  eccie  iaia,  Sanctorum  communionem. 

Pr^e.  in  conf.  Boilsm.    lb.  part  2  p,  2S4> 


239 

mutually  communicate  to  each  other  all  the  good 
things  which  God  bestows  upon  them.  By  which, 
however,  the  diversity  of  his  favours  is  not  de- 
stroyed; as  we  know  that  the  gifts  of  the  Spirit 
are  variously  distributed ;  nor  is  that  political  or- 
der plucked  up,  by  which  every  one  is  at  liberty 
to  possess  his  own  wealth  in  his  private  right ;  as 
it  is  necessary,  for  the  sake  of  preserving  peace 
among  men,  that  the  control  of  property  should 
be  distinct  and  independent.  But  there  is  as- 
serted such  a  community  as  Luke  describes,  that 
the  multitude  of  believers  had  hut  one  heart  and  one 
soul;  and  Paul^  when  he  exhorts  the  Ephesians 
to  be  one  body  and  one  spirit^  as  they  are  called  in 
one  hope.  For  it  cannot  be,  if  they  are  truly  per- 
suaded that  God  is  their  common  father,  and 
Christ  their  common  head,  but  that  joined  to- 
gether in  brotherly  love,  they  will  most  freely 
interchange  their  privileges."* 


*  duanquam  articulus  Symboli  ad  externam  quoque  Ecclesiarn  ali- 
quatenuH  pertinet;  ut  se  quisque  no<^trum  in  fraterno  consensu  cum  om- 
nibus Dei  filiis  contineat—Ecclesii'^  deferat  quam  nieretur  auctorita- 
tem — deniqne  se  ita  gerat  ut  ovis  ex  grege.  Atque  ideo  adjungitur 
SANCTORU]vtcoMMirNicATio:quJeparticuIa,  licet  a  veteribus  fere  prner- 
termissasit,  non  taraen  negligenda  est,  quiaEccle-isp  qualitateni  optimc 
exprimit.  €tuasi  dictum  esFet,  hac  lege  aggregari  Sancto«  in  pocieta- 
tem  Christi,  ut  qusecunqne  in  eos  beneficia  in  eos  confert  inter  se  mu- 
tuo  communicent.  Ctuo  taraen  non  tollit'^r  gratiarum  diver'itas  ;  si- 
cuti  scimus  varie  distribui  Spiritus  dona :  neque  etiam  convelUtur  ordo 

31 


240 

And,  to  put  the  matter  beyond  all  question, 
when  he  is  shewing  that  "  we  are  in  no  manner 
to  depart  from  the  communion  of  saints,"  he 
"  refutes  the  errours  of  the  Novatians,  the  Ana- 
baptists  and  other  sc/iismatical  and  idle-minded 
men  of  the  same  stamp;"  whose  schism  we 
know,  consisted  precisely  in  their  refusing  to 
hold  communion  with  other  churches  than  their 
own.  This  Calvin  reprobates  as  a  violation  of 
the  "  communion  of  saints  ;"  and  consider- 
ing the  unparalleled  acceptance  of  his  w^ork 
with  the  Reformed  churches,  his  interpretation 
must  be  regarded  as  their  common  judgment. 
Other  reformers  speak  in  the  same  strain. 

From  the  days  of  Calvin  and  the  Reformation, 
to  the  Westminster  Assembly  in  1643,  no  altera- 
tion, on  this  point,  appears  to  have  occurred 
in  the  sense  of  the  rehgious  world.  Take  two  or 
three  proofs. 


pollticus,  quo  suas  cuique  facultates  privatim  possidere  licet ;  ut  ne- 
cesse  est,  pacis  inter  homines  conservandae  causa,  rerum  dominia  inter 
ipsos  propria  et  distincta  esse.  Sed  asseritur  communitas  qualem  Lu- 
cas describit,  quod  multitudinis  credentium  esset  cor  unum  et  anima  una : 
et  Paulus,  quum  hortatur  Ephesios  ut  sint  unum  corpus,  unus  spiritus, 
sicuti  vocati  sunt  in  una  spe.  Neque  enim  fieri  potest,  si  vere  persuasi 
sunt  Deum  communem  sibi  omnibus  patrem  esse,  et  Christum  commune 
caput,  quin,  fraterno  inter  se  amoreconjuncti,  ultro  citroque  sua  c©m 
niunicent. 

InsTIT.  Lib.  iv.  cap.  i.  ?  S 


241 

The  133d  psalm  beginning,  Behold  how  good 
and  how  pleasant  it  is  for  brethren  to  dwell  together 
in  unity!  has  been  applied,  time  immemorial,  to 
the  harmony  and  love  of  Christians  in  their  church- 
communion.  It  is  so  at  the  present  day  ;  and  in 
several  churches,  particularly  in  those  which  most 
strenuously  support  the  distinction  I  am  combat- 
ting, is  sung  at  the  conclusion  of  Presbyterial  and 
Synodical  meetings.  Now  the  Translators  of 
the  Bible  have  marked  the  contents  of  this  psalm 
as  displaying  "  the  benefits  of  the  communion  of 
SAINTS."  Whether  the  application  is  correct  or 
incorrect,  makes  no  difference  in  the  argument. 
For  as  it  was  current  in  the  Christian  world,  the 
Translators,  by  their  designation  of  the  psalm, 
have  shewn  that,  in  their  eyes,  "  church-com- 
munion," and  "  communion  of  saints,"  mean  the 
same  thing.  They  were  forty-seven  of  the  most 
.learned  Divines  in  England  ;  and  can  hardly  be 
supposed  to  have  mistaken  the  publick  sense  of 
an  expression  so  habitually  repeated  in  the  church 
service.  They  performed  their  work  between 
1606  and  1611. 

Dr.  John  Davenant,  one  of  the  English  Di- 
vines at  the  Synod  of  Dordt,  afterwards  bishop 
of  Salisbury,  in  a  letter  written  about  1634,  to 
John  Dur^us,  a  Scotsman,  celebrated  for  his 
endeavours   to  unite  the  Protestant  churches, 


242 

thus  expresses  himself.  "  The  church  of  Rome 
alone  has  gone  to  such  a  high  pitch  of  pride  and 
madness  as  to  thrust  out  from  the  "  communion  of 
saints^^''  and  devote  to  hell,  all  the  churches  which 
refuse  submission  to  the  antichristian  yoke  of  ab- 
solute and  blind  obedience."^ 

The  most  reverend  and  learned  James  Usher, 
afterwards  archbishop  of  Armagh^  and  one  of  the 
original  members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
preached  a  sacramental  sermon  in  1620,  before 
the  House  of  Commons,  from  1  Cor.  x.  17.  We^ 
being  many^  are  one  bread  and  one  body :  for  ive 
are  all  partakers  of  that  one  bread*  In  this  ser- 
mon, he  observes,  "  the  Apostle  maketh  our  par- 
taking of  the  Lord's  table  to  be  a  testimony  not 
only  of  the  union  and  communion  which  we 
have  betwixt  ourselves  and  with  our  Head,  (which 
he  doth  in  the  express  words  which  I  have  read,) 
but  also  of  our  disunion  and  separation  from  all 
idolatrous  worship. 

"  The  effect,  therefore,  of  that  which  St.  Paul 
in  express  terms  here  delivereth,  is  the  commu- 
nion of  saints:  which  consisteth  of  two  parts,  the 
fellowship  which  they  have  with  the  Body^  laid 
down  in  the  beginning  ;.and  the  fellowship  which 
they  have  with  the  Head^  laid  down  in  the  end 

*  Sentenja  D.  Davenantii,  p.  6.  Cant.  1640.  ISmo. 


243 

of  the  verse."  In  expounding  the  first  part,  he 
not  only  mentions  explicitly  "  both  our  baptism 
and  our  drinking  of  the  Lord's  cup,"  as  belong- 
ing to  the  communion  of  saints,  but  handles  the 
sin  of  schism,  or  "  making  a  rent  in  the  church  of 
God,"  as  a  breach  of  this  communion ;  and  he 
exhorts  Christians  to  "remember  that  as  oft  as 
we  come  unto  the  Lord's  table,  so  oft  do  we 
enter  into  new  bonds  of  peace,  and  lye  ourselves 
with  firmer  knots  of  love  together:  this  blessed 
communion  being  a  sacred  seal  not  only  of  the 
imion  which  we  have  with  our  Head  by  faith;  but 
also  of  our  conjunction  with  the  other  members 
of  the  body"  (the  body  of  Christ,)  by  /ot^e."* 

Richard  Baxter,  a  holy  man  of  God,  of  me- 
rited celebrity  in  the  church,  and  contemporary 
with  the  Westminster  assembly,  has,  in  his  trea- 
tise entitled  A  Christian  Directory,  a  long  chapter 
on  the  nature  of  church  union  and  communion, 
which  is  thus  headed,  "  Directions  for  the  union 
AND  COMMUNION  of  SAINTS  ,*  aud  the  avoiding  un- 
peaceahleness  and  scHisM."t  His  6th  direction  is, 
"  Make  nothing  necessary  to  the  unity  of  the 
church,  or  the  communion  of  Christians,  which 
God  hath  not  made  necessary,  or  directed  you  to 


»  p.  2—9.  Lond.  1631.  4to. 

t  Chap.  viii.  of  said  Treatise,  Works,  Vol.  i.  p.  590—608. 


:244 

make  so."*  Here  "church-communion,"  "com- 
munion of  saints,"  and  "  communion  of  Chris- 
tians," are  evidently  used  by  Mr.  Baxter  as  con- 
vertible terms  ;  and  it  is  equally  evident  that  in 
using  them  thus  indifferently,  the  one  for  the 
other,  he  speaks  the  language  of  the  church  in 
his  day. 

Furthermore.  The  Westminster  confession  of 
faith  was.  substantially  adopted  by  the  churches 
of  Connecticut  assembled,  by  delegation,  at  Say- 
brookj  September  9th,  1708.  Under  this  very 
head,  viz.  the  communion  of  saints,  they  have  in- 
troduced the  section  we  are  now  considering, 
with  the  following  variation:  "which  communion, 
though  especially  to  be  exercised  by  them  in  the  re- 
lations  wherein  they  stand,  whether  in  families  or 
CHURCHES,  yet,  as  God  offereth  opportunity,  is  to 
be  extended  unto  all  those  who  in  every  place 
call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus."t  Note^ 
this  "communion"  is  to  be  exercised  by  "saints" 
in  their  church-capacity;  it  is  therefore  church- 
eommimion. 

The  very  same  sense  continued  to  be  affixed 
to  it  long  after,  and  that  in  the  church  of  Scot* 
land ;  from  which  all  the  parties  embarked  in  this 

*  Ib.  p.  601.  V  83. 

t  AcoNFEssTON  OF  FAITH,  kc.  cliap.  xxvii,  p.  80.  New  London, 
niO.  1I!mo. 


245 

part  of  the  discussion  are  derived.  The  great 
and  good  Thomas  Boston,  who  died  in  1732, 
preached  several  sermons  from  1  Cor.  x.  17, 
which  he  afterwards  reduced  into  a  tract,  entitled, 
"  The  unity  of  the  body  of  Christy  and  the  duty  the 
members  owe  one  to  one  another, "  His  text  is  the 
same  with  Usher's,  quoted  above,  and  so  is  his 
general  mode  of  treating  it ;  only  he  is  much 
more  minute  and  ample  than  the  Irish  prelate. 

The  broad  doctrinal  proposition  which  he  de- 
velopes  and  applies,  is  this ; 

"DocT.  There  is  a  communion  of  saints 
among  themselves^  as  being  conjoined  info  one  mys- 
tical body  of  Christ  declared  and  avouched  by  par- 
takers OF  THE  SACRAMENTS,  especially  that  of  the 
Lord^s  Supper y  every  one  for  themselves.^^^  And 
again,  he  says  that  *4he  sacraments  are  the 
external  bond  of  this  communiony\  But  sacra- 
mental communion  is  "  church-communion  ;'^ 
therefore  "  church-communion"  is  "  the  com- 
munion of  saints." 

Nay,  so  firmly  was  this  sense  fixed  in  the  churchy 
that  the  excellent  John  Brow^n,  of  Haddi^igton^ 
even  after  he  had  been  accustomed  to  the  dis- 
tinction both  in  theory  and  practice,  (being,  ac- 
cording to  his  worthy  son  and  biographer,  "  strict j 

*  Works,  p.  291.  J?(^<>?.  1T67.  fnl.  t  Tb.  p.  29-i. 


246 

in  ivhat  is  called  church-communion  ;"  and  "  as 
to  what  is  named  the  communion  of  saints^  as 
distinguished  from  it,  liberal,^^)  even  John  Browk 
himself  could  not  altogether  rid  himself  of  the 
received  interpretation,  but,  forgetting  the  new 
distinction,  thus  expressed  himself  concerning 
the  Seceders,  who  left  their  ministers  in  the  esta- 
blished church  of  Scotland :  "  In  vain  you  told 
them  that  their  withdrawment  was  a  breaking 
up  of  the  communion  of  saints,^^  And  again, 
"  They,"  the  seceders,  "  challenged  you  to  prove 
that  Luther  and  Calvin's  obedience  to  that  com- 
mand," the  command  of  God,  to  leave  the  church 
of  Rome,  "  amounted  to  a  breaking  up  of  the 
communion  ofsaints,^^*  But  the  communion  from 
which  Luther  and  Calvin  withdrew  was  certain- 
ly church' communion ;  therefore,  Mr.  Brown  him- 
self being  judge,  ^'church-communion^^  is  "  com- 
munion of  saints."  And  so  he  has  inadvertently 
exploded  his  own  distinction  upon  which  he  and 
his  brethren  w^ere  acting;  and  upon  which  the 
secession-churches,  their  American  descendants 
and  some  others  have,  for  the  most  part,  con- 
tinued to  act  to  this  hour.f     Let  us  return. 


*  An  Historical  Account  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the  Secession,  p. 
30,31.     Glasgow.  1780.  12mo. 

t  The  distinction  between  "  church-communion,"  and  "  communion 
of  saints,"  so  as  t©  exclude  the  former  from  the  latter,  is  called  a  new 


247 

It  has  now  been  proved  that  the  principal,  the 
reigning  idea  of  the  term  "cominunion  of  saints," 
from  its  introduction  into  the  Apostles'  creed, 


one;  and  it  is  proved  to  be  so  by  the  preceding  historical  induction. 
The  precise  period   of  its  adoption   is  not  easy  to  fix.     But  as  it 
never  appeared,  so  far  as  the  authour  can  ascertain,  before  the  com- 
piete  severance  of  the  Seceders   from  the  Scottish  establishment,  it 
seems  to  have  been  then  introduced,  and  probably  in  the  following 
manner.     The  Seceding  brethren  had  been  in  the  habit  of  holding 
communion  with  faithful  ministers  of  the  establishment,  after  the  breach. 
But  as  contention  between  the  two  parties  waxed  hot,  and  they  were 
perhaps  taxed  with  inconsistency  for  holding  communion  with  one  part 
of  a  church,  and  refusing  it  with  anotiier,  the  intercourse  became  un- 
comfortable, and  it  was  dropped.     But  here  arose  a  new  dilticult)'. 
The  Seceders  did  not  deny  the  church  of  Scotland  to  be  a  true  church 
of  Christ.     Why  then  did  they  fly  in  the  face  of  their  own  confessioa 
of  faith,  by  declining  all   communion  with  her?     Especially  as  they 
stoutly  maintained  that  they  never  renouaced  the  diurch  of  Scotland^ 
but  only  a  corrupt  party  in  it.     *'  Indeed  !  then  one  of  two  things  : 
either  expunge  the  article  on  that  subject  from  your  confession,  oi' 
retread   your  steps  '*     They   could   do  neither.     Their  consciences 
would  not  permit  the  first,  nor  their  feelings  the  second.     What  was 
to  be  done?   If  under  "  communion  of  saints,"  their  confession  treats 
of  "  church-communion,"   the  contradiction  is  palpable  :  there  is  no 
escape.     To  avoid  this  distress,  they  seem  to  have  hit  upon  the  dis- 
tinction as  it  has  ever  since  been  maintained  ;  and  had  it  been  a  sound 
one,  it  would  elFectually  have  served  their  purpose.  For  if  the  chapter 
on  "  eommunion  of  saints,"  lays  down,  in  its  second  section,  the  doc- 
trine of  communion  as  it  subsists  between  Christians  in  their  private 
character  merely,  and  not  as  it  subsists  between  them  in  their  pub- 
lic relations ;  i.  e.  if  it  does  not  lay  down  the  doctrine  of  "'  church- 
communion,"  all  was  safe.    The  Seceders  could  very  consistently  ad- 
here to  the  confession,  and  yet  renounce  communion  with  the  church 
of  Scotland.     And  thus,  instead  of  being  tossed  backwards  and  for- 
wards upon  the  horns  of  a  cruel  dilemma,  tiiey  very  fairly  and  adroit- 
ly slipped  ont  between  them.     But  if,  as  has  been  demonstrated, 

32 


248 

about  the  fifth  century,  through  the  whole  of  the 
Reformation  from  Popery,  and  of  the  subsequent 
period,  down  to  the  sitting  of  the  Assembly  at 
Westminster,  was  precisely  that  of  "  church- 
communion."  Consequently  the  chapter  which, 
in  their  confession,  they  have  themselves  entitled 
"  Of  Communion  of  Saints ^^"^  whatever  else  it 
may  include,  must  be  interpreted,  according  to 
the  known  and  undisputed  sense  of  the  phrase, 
as  treating  expressly  and  officially  of  Church- 
communion, 

%  Let  us  in  the  next  place  see  what  light  is 
shed  on  this  subject  by  the  confession  itself:  so 
that  the  Westminster  fathers  may  be  their  own 
expositors. 

In  the  Larger  Catechism^  which  is  nothing  but 
the  confession  reduced  to  question  and  answer, 
the  "  communion  of  saints"  is  said  to  be  one  of 
the  "  special  privileges  of  the  visible  church."* 
But  a  privilege  which  belongs  and  is  peculiar  to 
her  as  the  visible  church,  belongs  and  is  peculiar 
to  her  in  her  church-capacity.  This  is  so  perfectly 

'*  communion  of  saints"  includes  '*  church-communion/*  it  is  worth 
looking  after  whether  they  are  out  of  the  reach  of  the  horns  yet.  Let 
a  remark  be  made  without  offence,  as  it  is  with  unfeigned  respect,  that 
the  Seceders  missed  their  course  when  they  rested  their  vindication 
upon  any  other  ground  than  their  violent  extrusion  from  the  church 
of  Scotland.  Should  the  writer  have  erred,  the  gain  is  their  own  ;  and 
they  win  pardon  a  mistake  which,  if  it  originates  in  ignorance,  has  at 
least  the  merit  of  frankness. 
*  GluEST.  63. 


249 

plain  as  to  be  little  more  than  a  tautology.  And 
the  communion  which  she  enjoys  in  her  church- 
capacity  is,  and  can  be,  nothing  else  than  church- 
communion.  Therefore,  the  confession  itself  be- 
ing judge,  c^wrcA-communion  is  the  communion 
of  saints. 

Again :  The  "  holy  fellowship  and  commu- 
nion," which  "  saints  by  profession  are  bound  to 
maintain,"  is  distributed  into  three  parts — It  is  to 
be  maintained 

(1.)  "  In  the  worship  of  God." 

(2.)  "  In  other  spiritual  services.'' 

(3.)  "  InreHevingeach  other  in  outward  things." 

In  regard  to  the  first  of  these,  let  the  Confes- 
sion itself  explain  what  is  meant  by  "  the  wor- 
ship of  God." 

"  The  reading  of  the  scriptures  with  godly  fear; 
the  sound  preaching,  and  conscionable  hearing 
of  the  word,  in  obedience  unto  God,  with  under- 
standing, faith,  and  reverence  ;  singing  of  psalms 
with  grace  in  the  heart ;  as  also  the  due  admini- 
stration and  worthy  receiving  of  the  sacratnents  in- 
stituted by  Christ ;  are  all  parts  of  the  ordinary 
religious  worship  of  God.^^^ 

For  "  worship  of  God,"  in  the  26th  chapter, 
substitute  the  description  of  that  worship  in  the 
25th ;  and  we  have  the  following  result — 


*  CoNF.  OE  FAITH.  Chap.  xxi. «  5. 


.      250 

"  Saints  by  profession  are  bound  to  maintain 
a  holy  fellowship  and  communion  in  the  publick 
preaching  and  hearing  of  the  word — in  the  praises 
of  God— and  in  the  sacraments  instituted  by 
Christ." 

If  this  is  not  "  church-communion,"  what  is  ? 
let  this,  according  to  our  "good  confession," 
belongs  to  the  "  communion  of  saints"  by  pro- 
fession. Whatever  else  belongs  to  it,  is  referrible 
to  the  second  or  third  of  the  particulars  enume- 
rated above,  which,  either  one  or  both,  compre- 
hends all  that  has  been  or  can  be  assigned  to  the 
"  coii'munion  of  saints,"  by  those  who  oppose  it 
to  "  church-communion." 

A  word  more.  The  "  communion  of  saints,  as 
God  ofFereth  opportunity,  is  to  be  extended," 
says  the  confession,  "  to  all  those  who  in  every 
place  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus."* 

*  This  clause  gome  restrict  to  the  relief  which  Christians  are  to  give 
each  other  in  temporal  matters  !  It  is  really  a  source  of  grief  and  hu- 
miliation, when  good  and  sensible  men  lower  themselves  to  an  eva- 
sion which  contradicts  the  first  principles  of  interpretation,  and  the 
very  references  of  the  confession  itself. 

The  chapter  treats  generally  of  "  communion  of  saints."  In  the 
second  paragraph  it  treats  especially  of  the  communion  of  "saints 
by  profession."  "  Which  communion,"  it  says,  "  is  to  be  extended," 
&c.  The  rules  of  grammar,  as  well  as  the  laws  of  interpretation,  re- 
«iuire  that  this  expression  embrace  the  u-hole  communion  immediately 
before  described;  and  cannot,  -without  palpable  unfairness,  be  re- 
tjtrained  to  a  sini^le  specification. 

The  annexed  scriptures  do  indeed  speak  of  communion  in  temporal 


251 

It  only  remains 

3.  To  compare  the  sense  thus  ascertained  of 
the  phrase  "  communion  of  saints,"  and  of  the 
chapter  under  that  title  in  the  Westminster  con- 
fession of  faith,  with  the  views  of  church-com- 
munion which  are  known  to  have  prevailed  at 
and  about  the  time  when  it  was  drawn  up.  Take 
such  facts  as  the  following. 

There  had  been  previously  published,  by  the 
joint  authority  of  the  French  and  Dutch  churches, 
a  harmony  of  the  Reformed  confessions,  digested 
under  distinct  heads :  So  that  whatever  is  con- 
tained in  the  several  confessions  on  any  one  sub- 
ject w^as  gathered  into  one  chapter  of  the  "  har- 
mony." And  it  was  compiled  for  the  very  end  of 
showing  to  the  world  the  concord  of  Protestants, 
not  excepting  the  Lutherans,  in  all  matters  which 
ought  to  form  the  bond  of  union  and  communi- 
on ;  and  thus  to  repel  the  reproach  of  the  Pa- 
things,  as  was  most  meet.  But  among  them  there  is  another  refer- 
ence to  quotations  under  letter  (c)  ;  which  are  alleged  to  prove  that 
saints,  "  are  obliged  to  the  performance  of  tuch  duties,  publick  and  pri- 
vate, as  do  conduce  to  their  mutual  good,  both  in  the  inward  and  out- 
ward man."  One  of  them  is  1  Thess.  v.  ii.  "  Wherefore  comfort  your- 
selves together,  and  edify  one  another,  even  as  also  ye  do."  There  is  not 
a  syllable  about  temporal  things  in  the  whole  chapter  :  and  surely  no 
one  will  be  so  gross  as  to  maintain  that  the  mutual  edification  of  be- 
lievers is  to  be  limited  to  their  communion  in  temporal  things — to 
whai  has  been  called  by  an  expression  facetiously  severe — '*  commu- 
nion in  beef  and  cabbage." 


252 

pisls,  that  they  were  separated  from'  each  other 
as  much  as  from  Rome.  The  preface  concludes 
with  the  following  apostrophe. 

"  Ye,  therefore,  most  gracious  Kings,  Dukes, 
Earls,  Marquises,  most  famous  Barons  and  noble 
Lords;  ye  cities  and  commonwealths  ;  ye  most 
wise  Pastors,  Doctors,  and  to  be  short,  all  Chris- 
tian People  professing  the  truth  of  the  Gospel^  be 
present  in  souls  and  bodies,  suffer  not  the  poison 
of  discord  to  spread  any  farther :  but  kill  this 
hurtful  serpent;  and  receive  with  a  Christian 
mind,  as  is  meet,  and  as  is  offered  unto  you,  this 
most  sure  token  and  earnest  of  the  everlasting 
friendship  of  the  French  and  Belgian  churches 
with  you,  offered  to  you  in  the  face  of  the  whole 
world ;  that  we,  being  by  a  xriendly  league  cou- 
pled together  in  Christ,  may  vanquish  all  Anti- 
christs, and  may  sing  that  Hymn  to  the  Lord  our 
God,  Behold!  how  good  and  joyful  a  thing  it  is 
for  brethren  to  dwell  together  in  unity !" 

This  book  was  translated  into  English  and  pub- 
lished in  London^  1643,  during  the  sitting  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly;  and  not  only  so,  but 
"  allowed  by  publique  authoritie."  This  "  pub- 
lique  authoritie,"  without  which  no  book  might 
be  printed,  was  lodged,  by  parliament,  in  June, 
1648,  for  the  department  of  Theology,  in  the 
hands  of  twelve  divines,  seven  of  whom  were  mem- 


253 

bers  of  the  Assembly,*  Now  it  is  hardly  possible 
that  such  a  committee  should  have  licensed  a 
book  containing  any  thing  materially  at  variance 
with  an  important  Christian  doctrine  as  received 
by  themselves,  when  they  formed  part  of  a  body 
of  men  who  were  about  to  assert  that  very  doc- 
trine as  so  received  ;  and  concerning  which  there 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  difference 
among  them. 

The  Assembly  itself  addressed  an  official  let- 
ter, of  November  30th,  1643,  "  To  the  Belgick, 
French,  Helvetian,  amd  other  Reformed  church- 
es ;"  whom  they  style  "  Right  Reverend  and 
dearly  beloved  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.^^  "  The 
inscription  was,  "  To  the  Reverend  and  learned 
pastors  and  elders  of  the  classes  and  churches  of 
Zealand,  our  much  honoured  brethren.'^'*  This 
letter  was  subscribed  not  only  by  the  Prolocutor, 
x\ssessors,  and  Scribes  of  the  Assembly,  but  by 
all  the  commissioners  from  the  church  of  Scot- 
land ;  among  whom  were  the  ever  famous  and 
venerable  Samuel  Rutherford,  and  George 
Gillespie.  The  letter  is  full  of  affection,  and 
evinces  peculiar  anxiety  for  the  good  opinion, 
sympathy,  and  prayers  of  those  churches.  It 
states,  in  so  many  words,  that  the  object  of  the 

*  Neal,  Vol.  II.  p.  ^-  compared  with  p.  38—41. 


264 

Assembly  was  "  to  commend  such  a  platform  to 
our  Zcrubbabek^^  (the  political  governours)  "  as 
may  be  most  agreeable  to  God?s  sacred  word,  near- 
est   IN    CONFORMITY   TO    THE    BEST    REFORMED 

CHURCHES  J  and  to  establish  unity  among  our- 
selves.''* 

It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  this  letter,  in  its 
general  address,  specifies  the  Belgick^  French^  and 
Helvetian  churches.  Now  these  are  the  very 
churches  which  signalized  themselves  on  the  side 
of  Catholick  communion.  The  efforts  of  the 
French  church  were  formerly  noticed — the  dispo- 
sitions of  the  Belgick  church  in  unison  with  the 
French  were  sufficiently  manifested  by  the  i>reface 
to  the  "Harmony"  just  quoted:  And  the  Hel- 
vetick  church  had  declared  she  should  be  guilty 
of  a  NEFARIOUS  SCHISM,  should  she  withdraw  from 
communion  with  other  churches  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. Yet  these  are  the  very  churches  to  which 
the  Westminster  Assembly  wished  most  nearly 
to  conform  the  church  in  England :  and  in  liiat 
wish  they  were  one  with  the  Scottish  Commis- 
sioners. What  shall  we  say  to  such  a  fact  ?  Shall 
we  say  that  the  churches  of  England  and  Scot- 
land,  through  the  medium  of  their  representa- 
tives at  Westminster,   trifled  with  the   foreign 

*  NEAt,  Vol.  II.  p.  62.  65. 


255 

churches  !  That  they  would  not  hold  communion 
with  those  to  whom  they  aimed  at  the  "  nearest 
conformity  ?^^  That  they  approached  these  church- 
es with  a  lie  in  their  mouth  ?  and  were  guilty  of 
such  cursed  hypocrisy,  as  to  hail  them  as  their 
"  dearly  beloved — their  much  honoured  brethren,  in 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,^^  while  at  the  very  same 
moment  they  did  not  account  their  ministers  to 
be  worthy  of  appearing  in  their  pulpits,  nor  their 
people  of  a  seat  with  themselves  at  the  table  of 
the  Lord  ?  If  not :  if  we  recoil  with  horrour  from 
such  an  imputation,  the  alternative  is  clear ;  they 
embraced,  and  were  ready  to  exemphfy,  equally 
with  the  Dutch,  French,  and  Siviss  churches,  the 
most  liberal  doctrine  of  communion  with  all,  of 
every  name,  "  who  held  the  HezVD." 

That  such  was  then  the  true  state  of  principle 
on  the  subject  of  communion — That  it  was  so  in- 
tended to  be  expressed,  and  was  so  understood 
when  expressed,  in  the  confession — that  like  the 
LuTHERS,  and  Calvins,  the  Melancthons,  and 
BucERS,  and  Martyrs;  like  the  Dutch,  French,' 
and  Svjiss  churches,  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
and  the  evangelical  interest  generally,  was  desi- 
rous of  bottoming  the  communion  of  the  church 
upon  the  broad  foundation  of  the  common  faith, 
without  regard  to  minor  differences,  is  one  of  the 
most  incontestible  facts  in  ecclesiastical  story, 

33 


.    266 

Besides  the  proofs  which  have  already  been  pro- 
duced, let  the  following,  out  of  a  multitude, 
suffice. 

(1.)  The  English  Anabaptists,  in  1644,  while 
the  Westminster  Assembly  was  sitting,  published 
their  confession  of  faith,  which  was  strictly  Cal- 
vinistical,  excepting  in  the  article  of  baptism  ;  but 
on  account  of  that  difference  they  declined  com- 
munion with  the  other  reformed  churches— a 
narrowness  which  greatly  displeased  and  scan- 
dalized their  Christian  neighbours.  For,  accord- 
ing to  Neal,  "  The  people  of  this  persuasion 
were  more  exposed  to  the  publick  resentments^  be- 
cause they  would  hold  communion  with  none 
but  such  as  had  been  dippedy^ 

Two  things  are  settled  by  this  testimony. 

First^  That  such  sectarian  communion  was 
contrary  to  the  feelings  and  habits  of  the  Calvi- 
nistic  churches  at  that  time,  or  it  would  not  have 
drawn  upon  the  Anabaptists  "  the  publick  resent- 
ments."    Thence, 

Secondly^  That  in  the  judgment  of  these 
churches,  neither  difference  in  the  government 
of  the  church,  (the  Anabaptists  being  Indepen- 
dents,) nor  different  views  of  the  subjects  and 
mode  of  baptism,  are  valid  reasons  for  breaking 
up  communion  :    and  therefore  that  to  refuse 

*  Vol.  II.  p.  112. 


257 

communion  on  their  account  is  a  worse  violation 
of  the  law  of  Christ,  than  an  errour  in  either  or 
in  both. 

(2.)  In  1654,  five  years  after  the  termination  of 
the  Assembly,  the  provincial  Synod  of  London 
pubhshed  a  book,  entitled  Jus  Divinvm  Ministerii 
Evangelici;  or^  The  Divine  Right  of  the  Gospel  Mi- 
nisiry.  The  ministerial  portion  of  a  committee 
of  that  Synod  at  its  first  meeting,  in  1647,  were 
all  members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  One 
of  them,  Mr.  Jeremiah  Whitaker,  had  a  chief 
hand  in  composing  their  work.*  It  is,  therefore, 
reasonable  to  conclude,  that  they  not  only  knew, 
but  expressed,  the  prevailing  sentiments  of  the 
Westminster  divines.  In  their  preface,  speaking 
of  the  dififerent  sorts  of  men  whom  they  had  to 
deal  with,  they  say,  to  use  their  own  words, 

"  5.  A  fifth  sort  are  our  Reverend  brethren  of 
New  and  Old  England  of  the  congregational 
WAY,  who  hold  our  churches  to  be  true  churches, 
and  our  ministers  true  ministers,  though  they 
differ  from  us  in  some  lesser  things.  We  have 
been  necessitated  to  fall  upon  some  things  where- 
in they  and  we  disagree,  and  have  represented 
the  reasons  of  our  dissent.  But  yet  we  here  pro- 
fess. That  this  disagreement  shall  not  hinder  us 
from  any  Christian  accord  with  them  in  aifec- 

*  Ne AL,  Vol.  II.  p.  261,  compared  with  p.  466. 


.258 

tion :  That  we  can  willingly  write  upon  our  stu- 
dy-doors  that  motto  which  Mr.  Jeremiah  Bur- 
ROUGHES  (who,  a  little  before  his  death,  did  am- 
bitiously endeavour  after  union  amongst  breth- 
ren, as  some  of  us  can  testify)  persuades  all 
scholars  unto, 

"  Opinionum  varietas^  et  ojnnantium  unitas  non 

sunt  *Vw'caTA."* 

And  that  we  shall  be  willing  to  entertain  any 
sincere  motion  (as  we  have  also  formerly  declar- 
ed in  our  printed  vindication)  that  shall  further 
a  happy  accommodation  between  us. 

"•  6.  The  last  sort  are  the  moderate,  godly 
episcopal  men,  that  hold  ordination  by  presby- 
ters to  be  lawful  and  valid;  that  a  bishop  and  a 
presbyter  are  one  and  the  same  order  of  ministry 
— that  are  orthodox  in  rloctrinal  truths  ;  and  yet 
hold,  that  the  *government  of  the  church  by  a 
perpetual  moderator  is  most  agreeable  to  scrip- 
ture-pattern. 

"  Though  herein  we  differ  from  them,  yet  we 
are  far  from  thmking  that  this  difference  should 
hinder  a  happy  union  between  them  and  us.  Nay, 
we  crave  leave  to  profess  to  the  world,  that  it 
will  never,  as  we  humbly  conceive,  be  well  with 
England,    till  there    he    an   union   endeavoured 

*  '•  Variety  of  opinions,  and  the  unity  of  those  who  hold  them,  are 
not  incompatible.'' 


259 

mid  effected  hetiveen  all  those  that  are  orthodox  in 
doctrine^  though  differing  among  themselves  in  some 
circumstances  about  church-government, 

^•Memorable  is  the  story  of  Bishop  Ridley  and 
Bishop  Hooper,  two  famous  Martyrs,  who,  when 
they  were  out  of  prison,  disagreed  about  certain 
ceremonial  garments :  but  w  hen  they  were  put  into 
prison  they  quickly  and  easily  agreed  together. 
Adversity  united  them  whom  prosperity  divided,^^"^ 

(3.)  The  ministers  and  messengers  of  above 
one  hundred  congregational  churches ;  among 
them  that  pnnce  of  modern  divines,  John  Owen, 
and  that  very  distinguished  minister  of  Christ, 
John  Howe,  met,  at  the  Savoy^  October  12, 1658; 
and  adopted  substantially  the  doctrines  of  the 
Westminster  confession  ;  among  the  rest,  the 
chapter  on  the  "  communion  of  saints."  Now 
as  this  has  been  proved  to  comprehend  "church- 
communion,"  it  would  never  have  received  the 
approbation  of  a  Synod  of  congregationalists  if  it 
had  been  supposed  not  to  leave  the  question 
about  external  order  among  the  matters  of  for- 
bearance. Especially  by  a  Synod  who  agreed, 
"  that  churches  consisting  of  persons  sound  in 
the  faith,  and  of  good  conversation,  ought  not  to 
refuse  communion  with  each  -other,  though  they 
walk  not  in  all  thitigs  according  to  the  same  rule  oj 


*  Preface  to  Jus  divinum,  kcc  Lond.  1654,  4to. 


260 

church-order \  and  if  they  judge  other  churches 
to  be  true  churches,  though  less  pure,  they  may 
receive  to  occasional  communion  such  members 
of  those  churches  as  are  credibly  testified  to  be 
godly,  and  to  live  without  offence.''* 

This  agreement  is  the  more  worthy  of  notice 
on  account  of  the  influence  which  Dr.  Owen  is 
conceded  to  have  possessed  in  the  Synod.  For 
there  has  not  been,  and  cannot  be  a  more  strenu- 
ous advocate  for  enlarged  communion  than  was 
that  champion  of  the  truth  of  Jesus,  that  terrour 
and  torment  of  its  vital  corrupters — the  Socini- 
ans.  He  maintains,  that  "  such  a  communion  of 
Churches  is  to  be  inquired  after,  as  from  which 
no  true  church  of  Christ  is,  or  can  be,  excluded  ; 
in  whose  actual  exercise  they  may  and  ought  all 
to  live  ;  and  whereby  the  general  end  of  all 
churches  in  the  edification  of  the  Catholick 
church,  m.ay  be  attained.  This  is  the  true  and 
only  Catholicism  of  the  church,  which  whoever 
departs  from,  or  substitutes  any  thing  else  in  the 
room  of  it,  Under  that  name,  destroys  its  whole 
nature,  and  disturbs  the  whole  ecclesiastical  har- 
mony that  is  of  Christ's  institution. 

"  However  therefore,  we  plead  for  the  rights 
of  particular  churches,  yet  our  real  controversy 

*  NBAi,,Vol.II.p.508. 


261 

with  most  in  the  world  is  for  the  being,  union, 
and  communion  of  the  church  Catholick,  which 
are  variously  perverted  by  many,  separating  it 
into  parties,  and  confining  it  to  rules,  measures, 
and  canons  of  their  own  finding  out  and  esta- 
blishment."* 

Again.  "  Had  the  Presbyterian  government 
been  settled,  at  the  King's,"  (Charles  the  II.) 
restoration,  by  the  encouragement  and  protection 
of  the  practice  of  it,  without  a  rigorous  imposition 
of  every  thing  supposed  by  any  to  belong  there- 
unto, or  a  mixture  of  human  constitutions;  if  there 
had  any  appearance  of  o,  schism  or  separation  con- 
tinued between  the  parties,  I  do  judge  they  would 
have  been  both  to  blame.  For  as  it  cannot  be 
expected  that  all  churches  and  all  persons  in 
them  should  agree  in  all  principles  and  practices 
belonging  unto  church-order,  nor  was  it  so  in  the 
days  of  the  Apostles,  nor  ever  since,  among  any 
true  churches  of  Christ :  so  all  the  fu7idamental 
principles  of  church-communion  would  have  been 
so  fixed  and  agreed  upon  between  them,  and  all 
offences  in  worship  so  removed,  as  that  it  would 
have  been  a  matter  of  no  great  art  absolutely  to 
unite  them,  or  to  maintain  a  firm  communion 
among  them,  no  more  than  in  the  days  of  the 

*  Owen's  TrutNatun  of  a  Gospel  Church.   Chap,  XI.  p.  2ST.  4to. 


262 

Apostles  and  the  primitive  times,  in  reference  to 
the  differences  that  were  among  churches  in  those 
days.  For  they  allowed  distinct  communion  up- 
on distinct  apprehensions  of  things  belonging  un- 
to church-order  or  worship,  all  'keeping  the  uni- 
ty of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.'  If  it  shall 
be  asked,  then,  why  they  did  not  formerly  agree 
in  the  Assembly  ?  I  answer  (I.)  I  was  none  of 
them,  and  cannot  tell.  (2.)  They  did  agree,  in 
my  judgment,  well  enough  ;  if  they  could  have 
thought  so :  and  farther  I  am  not  concerned  in 
the  difference."* 

When  Dr.  Owen  admits  that  the  Presbyteri- 
ans and  Independents  "  did  not  agree  in  the  As- 
sembly;" he  means  that  they  did  not  agree  in  a 
scheme  o^publick  ecclesiastical  imion.f 

*  Owen's  Inquiry  inlo  the  Original^  Szc.  of  Evangelical  Churches^  p. 
34T.  4to. 

t  The  greater  part  of  Christendom,  in  that  age,  had  its  head  full  of 
the  idea  of  a  national  church  in  alliance  with  the  state  ;  and  to  that  na- 
tional church  every  body  must  conform.  They  therefore  made  a  w;de, 
but  not  a  very  scriptural,  difference,  between  the  treatment  of  those 
who  favoured  a  particular  form  of  church  govern;.^ent  at  home,  and 
thoi-e  who  favoured  it  abroad.  What  in  the  latter  case  was  no  obsta- 
cle to  brotherly  affection  and  intercourse,  was,  in  the  foraier,  an  un- 
pardonable offence  ;  fit  to  be  argued  with  by  civil  pains  and  penalties. 
Thus,  when  Elizabeth's  government  was  helping  the  Presbyterians 
of  France^  it  was  plaguing  and  persecuting  the  Presbyterians  of  jEJng- 
land.  And  when  the  Presbyterians  gained  the  ascendancy  under 
Charles  I.  and  Oliver  Cromwell,  nothing  would  do  but  all  the 
■world  must  be  Presbyterians!  and  if  the  Theologians  could  not  en- 


263 

That  such  was  the  real  state  of  the  case  ;  that 
churches  were  kept  asunder  in  England  from 
mere  party  feeling,  is  roundly  averred  by  one  of 
their  noblest  men,  Mr.  John  Howe.  "  I  cannot 
forget,"  says  he,  "that  sometime  discoursing 
with  some  very  noted  persons  about  the  business 
of  union  among  Christians,  it  hath  been  freely 
granted  me,  that  there  was  not  so  much  as  a 
principle  left  (among  those  the  discourse  had  re- 
ference to)  upon  which  to  disagree ;  and  yet  the 
same  fixed  aversion  to  union  continued  as  before ; 
as  a  plain  proof  they  Avere  not  principles,  but  ends 
we  were  to  differ  for."* 

Let  us,  for  a  moment,  hear  this  dignified  ad- 
vocate of  Catholick  fellowship  plead  its  cause 
in  his  own  nervous  language. 

"  The  more  tridi/  Catholick  the  communion  of 
Christians  is,  it  is  tlie  more  truly  Christian.'^^f 

"  Nor  is  it  mere  Peace  that  is  to  be  aimed  at, 
but  free,  mutual,  Christian- communion  with  such 
as  do  all  hold  the  Head  Christ  : 

"  As  peace  between  nations  infers  commerce  ; 
so  among  Christian  churches,  it  ought  to  infer  a 


lig'iten  them  in  the  expediency  of  such  a  measure,  their  la-^k  of  success 
must  be  supplied  by  that  great  master  of  syllogisms — the  attorney 
general! 

*  Works,  Vol.  ii.  p.  274.  Lond.  1724.  Fol. 

t  Works,  Vol.  ii.  p.  338.  Lond.  1724.  Fol. 

34 


2G4 

fellowship  in  acts  of  worship.  I  wish  there  were  no 
cause  to  say  this  is  dechned  when  no  pretence 
is  left  against  it  but  false   accusation  ;  none  but 
what  must  be  supported  by  lying  and  cakinuiy. 
Too  many  are  busy  at  inventing  of  that  which  is 
no  where  to  be  found,  that  exists  not  in  the  nature 
of  things,  that  they  may  have  a  colour  for  conti- 
nued distance.     And  is  not  this  to  fly  in  the  face 
of  the  authority  under  w^hich  we  live,  i.  e.  the  rul- 
ing power  of  the  kingdom   of  Christ,  the  Prince 
of  Peace  ?  '11^  strange  they  are  not  ashamed  to 
be  called  Christians  ;  that  they  do  not  discard  and 
abandon  the  name,  that  can  allow  themselves  in 
such  things!  And  'tis  here  to  be  noted,  that  'tis 
quite  another  thing,  what  is  in  itself  true  ox  falser 
right  or  ivrong ;  and  what  is  to  be  a  measure  or 
houndanj  of  Christian-communion,     Are  we  yet 
to  learn,  that  Christian-communion  is  not  amongst 
men  that  are  perfect ;  but  that  are  labouring  un- 
der manifold  imperfections,  both  in  knowledge 
and  holiness  I  And  whatsoever  mistake  in  judg- 
ment or  obliquity  in  practice  can  consist  with 
holding  the  Head^  ought  to  consist  also  with  being 
of  the  same  Christian-communion  ;  not  the  same 
locally^  which  is  impossible;  but  the  same  occa- 
sionally, as  any  providence  invites,  at  this  or  that 
time;  and  mentally,  in  heart  and  spirit,  at  all 
times.     And  to  such  peace  (and  consequently 


265 

cornmiinion)  we  are  all  called^  hi  one^hody,  Col. 
iii.  15.  We  are  expressly  required  to  receive  one 
another^  (which  cannot  but  mean  into  each  others 
communion,)  and  not  to  donbtful  disputations^ 
Rom.  xiv.  1.  If  any  be  thought  to  be  weak,  and 
thereupon  to  differ  from  us  in  some  or  other  sen- 
timents, if  the  difference  consists  with  holding 
the  Head^  they  are  not,  because  they  are  weak, 
to  be  refused  communion,  but  received  ;  and  re- 
ceived, because  the  Lord  has  received  them^  ver.  3. 
AW  that  we  should  think  Christ  has  received  into 
his  communion,  we  ought  to  receive  into  ours, 
Rom.  XV.  7.  Scriptures  are  so  express  to  this 
purpose,  that  nothing  can  be  more, 

"  And  indeed,  to  make  new  boundaries  of 
Christian-communion,  is  to  make  a  new  Christi- 
anity, ^nd?iNeAV  Gospel^ixnd  new  rules  of  Christ's 
kingdom  ;  and  by  which  to  distinguish  subjects 
and  rebels,  and  in  effect  to  dethrone  him,  to  ri- 
val him  in  his  highest  prerogative,  viz.  the  estab- 
lishing the  terms  of  life  and  death  for  men  liv- 
ing under  his  Gospel  :  It  is  to  confine  salvation, 
in  the  means  of  it,  to  such  or  such  a  party,  such 
a  church,  arbitrarily  distinguished  from  the  rest  of 
Christians  ;  as  if  the  privileges  of  his  kingdom 
belonged  to  a  party  only  ;  and  that,  for  instance, 
the  Lord's  Table  were  to  lose  its  name,  and  be 
no  longer  so  called,  but  the  table  of  this  or  that 


266 

church,  constituted  by  rules  of  their  own  devising^ 
For  if  it  be  the  Lord's  Table,  they  are  to  kee})  it 
free,  to  be  approached  upon  the  Lord's  terms, 
and  not  their  own.  In  the  mean  time,  what  high- 
er invasion  can  there  be  of  Christ's  rights  ?  and 
since  the  Christian  church  became  so  overvvise 
above  what  is  written,  in  framing  new  doctrines 
and  rules  of  worship,  how  miserably  it  hath  lan- 
guished, and  been  torn  in  pieces,  they  cannot  be 
ignorant  who  have  read  any  thing  of  the  history 
of  it."* 

(4.)  Such  were  the  prevailing  sentiment  among 
the  Independents.  Let  us  now  turn  again  to 
the  Presbyterians  ;  and  see  how  the  communi- 
on of  the  church  appears  under  the  irradiation  of 
their  "  burning  and  shining  lights." 

Dr.  Manton  protests  against  "  the  breaking  off 
xhurch-fellowship  and  communion,  and  making 
rents  in  the  body  of  Christ  because  of  difference 
of  opinion  in  smaller  matters,  when  we  agree  in 
the  more  weighty  things.  We  are  to  ivalk  togeth- 
er as  far  as  we  are  agreed.  Phil,  iii.  16.  and  ex- 
ternals wherein  we  diifer,  lying  far  from  the  heart 
of  religion,  are  nothing  to  faith  and  the  new  crea- 
ture, wherein  we  agree.    Gal.  v.  6.  and  vi.   15. 


*  Howe's  sermon,  entitled  "  Peosce,  God^s  blessing ;^f  Works,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  274. 


k 


267 

The  most  weight  should  be  pitched  upon  the 
fundamentals  and  essentials  of  reWgion :  and  where 
there  is  an  agreement  in  these,  private  differen- 
ces in  smaller  matters  should  not  make  us  break 
off  from  one  another."* 

What  these  "  smaller  matters"  are,  which  ac- 
cording to  this  admirable  divine,  should  be  no 
impediment  to  church-communion,  his  own 
words  indicate  ;  they  are  all  things  which  cannot 
be  ranked  among  the  essentials  of  Christianity  ^ 
whether  they  be  matters  of  discipline  or  wor- 
ship, of  government  or  doctrine.  That  his  lan- 
guage is  not  stretched,  by  this  interpretation,  be- 
yond its  true  meaning,  he  has  himself  decided. 
"  The  only  lavjful  grounds  of  separation,"  says  he, 
'^  are  three,  1.  Intolerable  persecution.  2.  Dam- 
nable heresy.  3.  Gross  idolatry."!  Every  thing 
else  is  tolerable,  and  to  be  tolerated  rather  than 
burst  the  bands  of  church-fellowship. 

Mr.  Richard  Vines,  a  member  of  the  Assem- 
bly, and  "a  very  learned  and  excellent  divine,"t 
in  his  "  Treatise  of  the  Sacramentofthe  Lord^s  Sup- 
per^^^  has  a  chapter  upon  the  following  question, 
"  Whether  a  godly  man  laicfiilly  may  or  ought  to 

*  Manton  on  JuDE.  p.  "IGi.  Lond.  1658.  4to. 

t  Ih.  p.  496.  In  the  margin  I.eadds  "  Under  this  head,"  {IntolerO' 
Table  Persecution)  "  is  coii;prised  sin/ul  e'xcGvununicationJ*  Let  Hiern 
mark  that  whom  it  concerns. 

I  Neal,  Vol.  ii.  p.  86. 


268 

stand  as  a  member  of^  and  hold  communion  in  the 
ordinances  of  God  with^  such  a  congregation  as  is 
mixt^  as  they  call  it ;  that  is,  ivhere  men  visibly  scan- 
dalous in  life  and  conversation  are  mingled  ivith  the 
good  in  the  participation  and  use  of  divine  ordinan- 
ces ?  Or^  whether  this  mixture  of  heterogeneals  do 
not  pollute  the  ordinances  and  the  communion  to  the 
godly,  so  as  they  are  concerned  to  separate  from 
such  communion  ?" 

The  chapter  is  too  long  to  be  inserted  entire : 
a  specimen  shall  suffice. 

"  The  church  may  be  corrupted  many  ways  in 
doctrine,  ordinances,  ivorship ;  and  this  I  account 
the  worst,  because  it  is  the  corruption  of  the  best, 
as  the  corruption  of  blood  that  runs  through  all 
the  body,  the  poisoning  of  springs  and  rivers  that 
run  through  a  nation,  is  worse  than  a  sore  finger 
in  the  body,  or  a  field  of  thistles  in  the  nation. 
And  there  are  degrees  of  this  corruption,  the  doc- 
trine in  some  remote  points,  hay  and  stubble  upon 
the  foundation ;  the  worship  in  some  rituals  or 
rites  of  men's  invention  or  custom.  How  many 
Scripture  churches  do  ye  find  thus  corrupted, 
and  yet  no  separation  of  Christ  from  the  Jewish 
church,  nor  any  command  to  the  godly  of  Corinth, 
(in  the  provinces  of  Gcdatia,)  or  those  of  Asia, 
in  the  Revelation;  I  must  in  such  case  avoid  the 
corruption,  hold  the  communion:  hear  them  in  Mo- 


269 

s€s^  chair,  and  yet  beware  of  their  leaven.  But  if 
corruptions  invade  the  fundamentals,  the  founda- 
tion of  doctrine  is  destroyed,  the  worship  is  be- 
come idolatrous,  the  leprosy  is  gotten  into  the 
walls  and  substance  of  the  house  :  and  which  is 
above  all,  if  the  church  impose  such  laws  of  their 
communion,  as  there  is  necessity  of  doing  or  ap- 
proving things  unlawful,  or  I  am  ruined  or  un- 
done, then  must  I  either  break  with  God  or  men, 
and  in  that  case,  come  out  of  Babylon,  The 
churches  of  Protestants  so  separated  from  them 
of  Rome  ;  it  was  a  necessary  and  just  separation, 
the  laws  of  their  communion  were  ruinous  to  the 
soul,  if  we  held  it  *,  to  the  body  and  life,  if  we 
held  it  not. 

In  sum  then,  and  in  conclusion  of  this  part 
about  doctrine  and  worship,  which  is  but  upon 
the  by  to  the  question.  If  a  corrupt  church,  as 
Israel  was,  have  their  ordinances  according  to  the 
pattern  in  the  Mount :  if  it  may  be  said,  as  Peter 
to  Christ,  John  vi.  68.  when  some  disciples  sepa- 
rated themselves.  Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal 
life;  if,  as  Christ  said  in  matters  of  worship, 
John  iv.  Salvation  is  of  the  Jews;  then,  as  he  said, 
Whither  shall  ive  go  ?  Why  do  we  separate  ?  And 
yet  I  would  not  be  mistaken  by  the  simplest  man, 
as  if  I  accounted  it  separation,  if  a  Christian  hear 
a  sermon,  or  receive  the  sacrament  in  another 


270 

congregation.  For  he  that  takes  a  meal  at  an- 
other table,  does  not  thereby  separate  from  his 
own  house.  Or  if  a  Christian,  at  liberty  to  dis- 
pose his  dwelling,  shall  remove  and  sit  down  un- 
der more  fruitful  ordinances  ;  I  account  not  this 
secession  a  separation,  no  more  than  if  being 
sickly,  and  having  not  health  in  the  city,  he  re- 
move his  seat  into  the  country  for  purer  air,  be- 
cause in  so  doing  he  removes  from  the  city,  but 
renounces  not  his  freedom  therein ;  nor  disclaims, 
in  like  proportion,  the  communion  of  the 
church."* 

Richard  Baxter  thus  writes :  "  I  do  not  lay 
so  great  a  stress  upon  the  external  modes  and 
forms  of  worship  as  many  young  professors  do. 
I  have  suspected  myself,  as  perhaps  the  reader 
may  do,  that  this  is  from  a  cooling  and  declining 
from  my  former  zeal,  (though  the  truth  is,  I  ne- 
ver much  complied  with  men  of  that  mind.) 
But  I  find  that  Judgment  and  Charity  are  the  caus- 
es of  it,  as  far  as  I  am  able  to  discover.  1  cannot 
be  so  narrow  in  my  principles  of  church-commu- 
nion as  many  are  ;  that  are  so  much  for  a  liturgy, 
or  so  much  against  it,  so  much  for  ceremonies,  or 
so  much  against  them,  that  they  can  hold  com- 
munion with  no  church  that  is  not  of  their  mind 

*  Chap.  XX.  p.  205,  206.  Lond.  1660.  4to. 


271 

and  way.  If  I  were  among  the  Greeks,  the  Lu- 
therans, the  Independents;  yea,  the  Anabaptists, 
(that  own  no  heresy,  nor  set  themselves  against 
charity  and  peace,)  I  would  hold  some  times  oc- 
casional communion  with  them  as  Christians,  (if 
they  will  give  me  leave,  without  forcing  me  to 
any  sinful  subscription  or  action :)  though  my  most 
usual  communion  should  be  with  that  society 
which  I  thought  most  agreeable  to  the  word  of 
God,  if  I  were  free  to  choose.  I  cannot  be  of  their 
opinion  that  think  God  will  not  accept  him  that 
prajethby  the  common  prayer  book,  and  that 
such  forms  are  a  self  invented  worship  which  God 
rejecteth :  Nor  yet  can  I  be  of  their  mind  that  say 
the  like  of  extemporary  prayers."*  Admirable 
principles,  admirably  expressed  !  Worthy  of  the 
man  whom,  bishop  Wilkins  being  judge,  it  was 
honour  enough  for  one  age  to  produce  :  and  who 
could  say,  as  "he  said  to  a  friend,  lean  as  willing- 
ly be  a  martyr  for  love,  as  for  any  article  of  the 
creed  y\ 

To  Mr.  Baxter  let  us  add  Dr.  William  Bates, 
to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  the  two  preceding 
anecdotes.  The  "  silver  Bates,"  as  he  is  styled 
by  Mr.   Hervey  ;  and  one  of  the  ministers  ap- 


*  Baxter's  Life,  Part.  i.  p.  133. 

t  Bates's  Funeral  Sermon  for  Mr.  Baxter,  Work'',  p.  728.  J m\d. 
1723.  Fol. 


272 

pointed  to  manage,  on  the  part  of  the  Presbyte- 
rians, the  conference  held  at  the  Savoy,  by  or- 
der of  Charles  II,  in  1661,  between  thein  and  a 
number  of  Episcopal  divines  on  the  part  of  the 
established  church. 

"  He  was,"  says  Mr.  Howe,  "  for  entire  union 
of  all  visible  Christians,  (or  saints,  or  believers, 
which  in  Scripture  are  equivalent  terms,)  meaning 
by  Christianity  what  is  essential  thereto,  whether 
doctrinal,  or  practical;  as  by  Humayiity  v\e  mean 
what  is  essential  to  man,  severing  accidents,  as 
being  not  of  the  essence ;  and  by  visibility^ 
the  probable  appearance  thereof:  and  for  free 
communion  of  all  such,  of  whatsoever  persua- 
sion, in  extra  essential  matters,  if  they  pleased. 
And  this  design  he  vigourously  pursued  as  long 
as  there  was  any  hope  ;  desisting  when  it  appear- 
ed hopeless,  and  resolving  to  wait  till  God  should 
give  a  Spirit  suitable  hereto ;  from  an  apprehen- 
sion that  when  principles  on  all  hands  were  so  ea- 
sily accommodable,  and  yet  that  there  w^as  with 
too  many  a  remaining  insuperable  reluctancy  to 
the  thing  itself,  God  must  work  the  cure,  and  not 
man.  Accounting  also,  in  the  mean  time,  that 
notwithstanding  misrepresentations,  it  was  better 
to  cast  a  mantle  over  the  failings  of  brethren, 
than  be  concerned  to  detect  and  expose  them. 
Knowing  that  if  w^e  be  principally  solicitous  for 


273 

the  name  of  God.,  he  will  in  his  own  way  and 
time  take  care  of  ours.  And  in  this  sentiment  he 
was  not  alone."* 

The  foregoing  are  only  a  sample.  We  must 
leave  individuals,  who  are  by  far  too  numerous  to 
quote  within  reasonable  bounds,  and  proceed  to 
a  few  facts  which  ascertain  the  collective  judg- 
ment and  practice  of  numbers  of  those  wise  and 
holy  men  who  about  that  time  were  the  glory  of 
England, 

(5.)  It  will  surprise  most  of  the  good  people 
who  adhere  to  the  Westminster  Confession,  (and 
well  they  may,)  as  a  rare,  and  perhaps  unequalled 
exhibition  of  sound  scriptural  doctrine,  that  the 
very  Assembly  who  prepared  it  were  so  far  from 
refusing  communion  on  account  of  those  things 
which  now  divide  many  precious  Christians  and 
Christian  churches,  that  notwithstanding  all  their 
convictions  and  complaints  of  the  abuses  and  cor- 
ruptions in  the  discipline,  worship,  and  govern- 
ment of  the  established  church,  they  nevertheless 
remained  steadily  in  her  fellowship ;  nor  did  they 
leave  it  until  they  were  cast  out  by  that  cruel  act 
for  conformity  which  would  not  allow  them  to 
mourn  and  submit,  but  required  them  also  to  ap- 
prove.    Then  they  arrived  at  the  extreme  limit 


*  Howe's  Funeral  Sermon  for  Dr.  Bates,  Works,  Vol.  ii.  p.  456. 


^74 

of  forbearance.  Communion  with  the  Episcopal 
church  was  not  worth  the  sacrifice  of  truth  and 
honesty  :  When  the  terms  of  conformity  became 
sinful,  there  was  no  room  for  hesitation — they  for- 
sook all  to  follow  Christ.  But  before  the  arrival 
of  so  afflicting  a  crisis,  they  endured  what  they 
disliked  for  the  sake  of  what  they  loved — they 
bore  with  many  and  great  defects  for  the  preser- 
vation of  unity :  and  while  they  had  the  substance 
of  Christianity  unincumbered  with  criminal  con- 
ditions, they  accounted  the  rupture  of  commu- 
nion a  worse  evil  than  the  scandals  against  which 
they  remonstrated.  "•  Remember,"  says  Mr.  Bax- 
ter, when  the  spirit  of  schism  began  to  spread 
its  venom  among  the  Presbyterian  and  Indepen- 
dent Dissenters,  "  Remember,  that  for  the  Com- 
mon Prayer,  and  Ceremonies,  and  Prelacy,  mul- 
titudes of  worthy,  holy  men,  conformed  to  them 
heretofore,  from  whom  you  would  not  have  se- 
parated; such  as  Dr.  Pkeston,  Dr.  Sibbs,  Dr. 
Taylor,  Dr.  Staughton,  Mr.  Gataker,  and  most, 
by  far,  of  the  late  Synod  at  Westminster.^'''^  "When 
they  went  thither,  they  were,"  he  says,  "  all  con- 
formists, save  about  eight  or  nine,  and  the  Scots 
commissioners."! 
Twelve  years  after  the  Assembly,  viz.  in  1660, 


*  Baxter's  Life,  Part  ii.  p.  439.  +  Ih.  Part  iii.  p.  149. 


275 

"the  well  meaning  Presbyterians ^^"^  as Neal  calls 
them  ;  i.  e.  the  Presbyterians  of  the  most  mode- 
rate and  Catholick  spirit — offered,  as  a  plan  of 
accommodation  with  the  Episcopahans,  "  Arch- 
bishop Usher's  model  of  primitive  Episcopa- 
cy :"  the  chief  feature  of  which  is,  that,  without 
destroying  the  distinctive  titles  of  arch-bishop, 
bishop,  and  presbyter,  as  known  in  England,  they 
might  be  conjoined  in  the  government  of  the 
church ;  a  bishop  hem^  perpetual  president  in  the 
eclesiastical  assemblies  made  up  of  Presby- 
ters.* 

They  offered  that "  the  surplice^  the  cross  in  hap- 
tisnij  and  kneeling  at  the  communion,  should  be 
left  indifferent." 

"  They  were  content  to  set  aside  the  Assem- 
hhfs  confession^  and  let  the  articles  of  the  church 
of  England  take  place  "with  some  few  amend- 
ments." In  pursuance  of  this  scheme,  about  the 
middle  of  June,  Mr.  Calamy,  Dr.  Reynolds,  Mr. 
Ash,  Mr.  Baxter,  Dr.  Wallis,  Dr.  Manton,  and 
Dr.  Spurstow  ,  waited  upon  the  king,  being  in- 
troduced by  the  Earl  of  Manchester^  to  crave  his 
majesty's  interposition  for  reconciling  the  differ- 
ences in  the  church,  that  the  people  might  not 
be  deprived  of  their  faithful  pastors."! 


*  Usher's  Reduction  of  Episcopacy  unto  the  Synodical  Form  of  Go- 
vernment.  Lond.  1658. 12mo. 
t  Neal,  Vol.  ii.  p.  567 


276 

Charles  received  them  very  affably ;  and  soon 
after  issued  a  "  declaration"  which  though  not 
equal  to  their  just  expectations,  vv^as  yet  so  favour- 
able as  to  draw  from  the  Presbyterians  about  Lon- 
don^ an  address  of  thanks  to  his  majesty,  which 
was  "  signed  by  Samuel  Clark,  William  Cooper, 
Thomas  Case,^  Jo,  Rawliiison,  Jo.  Sheffield^  Tho- 
mas Gouge,  Gab.  Sanger,  EL  Pledger,  Matthew 
Pool,  Jo.  Gibbon,^  William  Whitaker,  Thomas 
Jacomb,  Thomas  Lye,  John  Jackson,^  John  Meri- 
ton,  William  Bates,  with  many  others."t  The 
three  marked  *  were  members  of  the  Assejnbly. 

That  the  disposition  to  a  compromise  with  the 
church  of  England,  conceding  some  pretty  im- 
portant points  to  her  Episcopal  predilections, 
and  stipulating  merely  for  toleration  and  forbear- 
ance on  other  matters  of  external  order,  did  not 
flow  from  transient  impressions,  but  from  mature 
conviction  and  settled  judgment,  is  proved  by 
subsequent  events.  Fourteen  years  afterwards, 
i.  e.  in  1675,  when  the  rigours  of  the  establish- 
ment on  the  one  side,  and  the  sufferings  of  the 
ejected  ministers  and  their  people  on  the  other, 
might  be  supposed  to  have  produced  mutual  re- 
pugnance and  exasperation,  Mr.  Baxter  drew 
up,  at  the  request  of  a  large  portion  of  the  puri- 

t  Id.  lb.  p.  568—584. 


277 

tan  interest,  a  "  Profession  of  Religrion,"  contain- 
ing, among  other  things,  the  following  clause  ; 
"  I  do  hold  that  the  book  of  Common  Prayer^  and 
of  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  containeth  in  it 
nothing  so  disagreeable  to  the  word  of  God,  as 
maketh  it  unlawful  to  live  in  the  peaceable  com- 
munion of  the  church  that  useth  it."*  Which  ac- 
cords entirely  with  the  spirit  of  the  English 
divines  in  the  Assembly,  who  w^ere  generally 
against  abjuring  Episcopacy  as  simply  unlaw- 
ful.f  Consequently,  it  never  could  have  been 
their  intention  to  subject  the  communion  of  the 
church  to  such  rigorous  limitations  as  have 
since  been  adopted  under  the  sanction  of  their 
name. 

These  professions  were  not  idle  words.  Not 
only  did  the  Puritans  in  general  commune  with 
each  other,  as  they  had  opportunity,  but  also,  at 
least  to  a  great  extent,  with  the  church  of  Eng- 
land— with  their  brethren  who  hated  them,  and 
cast  them  out,  for  their  master's  name^s  sake;  and 
who  said,  as  some  others  have  said  in  the  act  of 
beating  their  fellow  servants,  "  Let  the  Lord  be 
glorified  /"  Take,  as  examples,  the  following  em- 
inent divines. 

Samuel  Clark,  father  of  the  authour  of  "  Jw- 

*  Baxteu»s  Life,  Part  iii.  p.  161.  t  Nbal,  Vol.  ii. p.  50. 


278 

notations  on  the  Bible^^^  unable  to  subscribe  the 
act  of  uniformity,  "laid  aside  his  ministry,  and 
attended  the  church  of  England  both  as  a  hear- 
er and  a  communicant.  For,  as  he  himself 
says,  he  durst  not  separate  from  it;  nor  was 
he  satisfied  about  gathering  a  private  church  out  of 
a  true  church,  which  he  judged  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land to  be."* 

Zachary  Crofton,  a  warm  advocate  for  the 
solemn  league  and  covenant,  was  sent  a  prisoner 
to  the  Tower  for  his  non-conformity  ;  and  w  hile 
there,  "he  attended  the  chapel  service,  being 
against  separation  from  the  parish-churches, 
though  he  himself  (as  a  minister)  could  not  use 
the  common  prayer  or  the  ceremonies."  And 
when  thus  suffering  for  the  truth's  sake,  by  the 
hand  of  the  establishment,  he  actually  wrote,  in 
the  Tower,  a  tract  entitled,  "  Reformation  not 
Separation;  a  Plea  for  Com^nunion  with  the 
Church;'  8ic.t 

Henry  Jessey,  after  his  ejectment,  turned 
Baptist ;  "  and  it  proved  no  small  honour  and  ad- 
vantage to  the  Baptists  to  have  such  a  man  among 
them.  But  notwithstanding  his  differing  from  his 
brethren  in  this,  or  any  other  point,  he  maintain- 
ed the  same  Christian  love  and  charity  to  all 


*  Non-conformist's  Memorial,  Land.  1802.  Vol.  i.  101. 
t  Ih.  103,  4. 


279 

saints  as  before,  not  only  as  to  friendly  conver- 
sation, but  also  in  regard  to  church- communion  : 
and  took  great  pains  to  promote  the  same  Catho- 
lick  spirit  among  others."* 

Dr.  Thomas  Gouge,  of  whom  it  has  been  said 
by  a  distinguished  prelate,  that  "all  things  consi- 
dered, there  have  not,  since  the  primitive  times  of 
Christianity,  been  many  among  the  sons  of  men 
to  v\^hom  that  glorious  character  of  the  Son  of 
God  might  be  better  appUed,  '  that  he  went  about 
doing  good ;'  although  persecuted  for  preaching, 
•Constantly  attended  the  parish-churches,  and 
communicated  there.f 

Richard  Wavel,  "  was  of  congregational  prin- 
ciples, but  of  extensive  charity.  It  was  his  prin- 
ciple and  constant  practice  to  receive  all  whom 
Christ  had  received,  without  any  debate  about  things 
of  a  doubtful  nature.^^t 

Dr.  Edmund  Staunton,  President  of  Corpus- 
Cliristi  college,  Oxford,  and  a  member  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  "  always  accommodated 
himself  to  those  that  differed  from  him,  as  far  as 
his  love  of  truth  would  permit,  saying,  All  men  must 
have  their  grains  of  allowance ; 'the  most  knowing 
Christians  know  but  in  part.   He  would  freely  con- 

*  lb.  ISO. 

t  Tillotson's  Sermons,  Vol.  ii.  p.  135.  8vo.  Lond.  1T57. 

+   NONCOJVF.  MEM.  i.  213. 

m 


280 

verse,  and  communicate  also,  with  those  that  held 
the  Head,  though  in  other  things  erroneous,^^  Yet, 
notwithstanding  this  latitude  of  charity,  "  his  zeal 
for  God  (to  use  the  words  of  David)  did  eat  him 

John  Jones,  "  a  bold  reprover  of  sin,  was  of  the 
congregational  jDcrsuasion,  of  a  Catholick  spirit, 
and  for  holding  communion  with  all  that  agreed 
in  the  main  points  of  Christianity,  though  they 
entertained  different  sentiments  about  lesser  mat- 
ters. He  told  some  of  his  friends  who  were  for  se- 
parating from  their  brethren  because  they  were  not 
altogether  of  their  own  principles,  that,  ^^for  his  part, 
he  ivoiild  he  one  ivith  every  body  that  was  one  with 
Christ,^^f  Admirable  sentence !  worthy  to  be  writ- 
ten, as  a  motto,  in  letters  of  gold,  over  the  doors 
of  every  place  of  Christian  worship. 

William  Bagshaw.  "  His  administration  of 
the  sacraments,  especially  that  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  was  very  solemn.  As  he  would  not  ad- 
mit the  grossly  ignorant  and  profane  to  that  sa- 
cred feast,  so  he  durst  not  exclude  those  in  whom 
he  saw  any  thing  of  the  image  of  Christ,  though 
they  were  of  different  sentiments  from  him  in  les- 
ser matters  of  religion." t 

Edmund  Calamy,  "  abhorred  a  close  and  nar- 

*  Ib.  221,227.        t  Ib.340.        $  Is.  406. 


281 

row  spirit,  which  affects,  or  confines  religion  to, 
a  party :  and  was  much  rather  for  a  compre/iew- 
,9^o^^,"  (i.  e.  for  a  scheme  of  union  and  commu- 
nion embracing  those  who  are  substantially  sound, 
leaving  smaller  matters  free,)  "  than  for  a  perpe- 
tual separation."* 

John  Farrol  :  "  an  humble,  peaceable,  la- 
borious divine."  When  ejected  for  nonconfor- 
mity, "  his  custom  was  to  go  to  the  publick"  (es- 
tablished) "  church,"  (from  which  he  had  been 
cast  out,)  "  as  his  people  also  did ;  and  either  be- 
fore or  after  to  preach  in  private.''t 

Daniel  PoYNTELL,  so  remarkably  blessed  in 
his  ministry  that  he  had  "  scarcely  a  pray erless 
family  in  his  parish,"  used,  even  after  his  eject- 
ment by  the  Bartholomew  act,  to  hold  ministe- 
rial fellowship  with  the  establishment;  by  preach- 
ing after  the  order  of  the  church  of  England,  as 
he  had  opportunity,  to  his  old  flock  at  Staple- 
hurst, t 

Isaac  Ambrose, the  well-known  authour  of  the 
treatise  entitled.  Looking  unto  Jesus,  was  one  of 
above  twenty  ministers  who  met  at  Bolton,  after 
the  Restoration  of  Charles  II,  "  to  consult  what 
course  to  take.  Mr.  Ambrose  and  Mr.  Cole,  of 
Preston,  declared  before  them  all,  that  they  could 

*  Id.  Vol.  ii.  208.        t  Ib.  2T9.        t  !«•  ^^6. 


282 

read  the  Common  Prayer^  «ind  should  doit;  the 
state  of  their  places  requiring  it,  in  which,  other- 
wise, their  service  was  now  necessarily  at  an 
end.'^ 

^J::^^  "  The  ministers,  considering  the  circum- 
stances of  their  case,  approved  their  proceeding,^^"^ 

John  Richardson,  "  in  his  judgment  about 
church-matters  was  moderate  and  sober;  never, 
condemning  any  for  differing  from  him  about  con- 
formity,"  (viz.  to  the  church  of  England,)  "whom 
he  thought  to  be  godly.  He  frequented  Dr.  Cum- 
berland''s,  (afterwards  Bishop  of  Peterborough's,) 
lecture  at  Stamford.  At  Kirkton  he  went  con- 
stantly to  the  church,  came  betimes,  joined  in 
the  liturgy  and  received  the  sacrament."! 

Edmund  Trench,  in  his  diary,  July  5, 1677,  re- 
marks, that  "  troublesome,  censorious,  dividing 
spirits  had  occasioned  more  thoughts  of  those  un- 
happy controversies  about  forms  and  ceremonies, 
church-government,  &c.  and  I  was  still  more  sa- 
tisfied, even  when  most  serious,  that  the  bitter  ex- 
tremes of  Dissenters,  as  well  as  of  rigid  Conform- 
ists, were  highly  displeasing  to  God :  that  spiritu- 
al pride,  narrow-spirited  mistakes,  and  griev- 
ous wresting  of  the  holy  Scriptures,  were  the  evil 
roots  of  unchristian  divisions  and  real  schism.     I 

*  IB.S62.         t  IB.4S1. 


283 

was  much  grieved  at  such  uncharitable  and  love- 
killing  principles  and  practices.'' 

Agreeably  to  this  "Christian  Catholicism,"  he, 
on  the  one  hand,  offered  to  Mr.  B.  the  minister 
of  the  parish,  "  to  preach  once  a  day  gratis,  and 
read  the  common  prayer  in  the  afternoon  :"  and 
"  on  the  other  hand,  he  refused  to  countenance 
a  certain  non-conformist  minister  there,  as  on 
other  accounts,  so  principally  for  his  binding  his 
people  against  all  communion  with  the  parish 
churches."* 

Matthew  Mead,  authour  of  The  Almost  Chris- 
tian  tried  and  cast.  "  His  judgment,  in  reference 
to  matters  of  church  order,  was  for  union  and 
communion  of  all  visible  Christians ;  viz.  of  such 
as  did  visibly  ^  hold  the  Head,'  as  to  the  princi- 
pal crcdenda  and  agenda  of  Christianity — the 
great  things  belonging  to  the  faith  and  practice  of 
a  Christian  ;  so  as  nothing  be  made  necessary  to 
Christian  communion  but  what  Christ  has  made 
necessary^  or  what  is  indeed  necessary  to  one's 
being  a  Christian.  What  he  publickly  essay- 
ed to  this  purpose  the  world  knows :  and  many 
more  private  endeavours  and  strugglings  of  his 
for  such  an  union,  I  have  not  been  unacquainted 
with.     The   unsuccessfulness  of  which  endea- 

*  Ib.454,  455. 


284 

vGurSj  he  said,  not  long  before  his  last  confine- 
ment, he  thought  would  break  his  heart."^ 

Francis  Tallents.  "In  king  William^s  time, 
when  overtures  were  made  towards  a  compre- 
hension, some  gentlemen,  who  greatly  valued  his 
judgment,  sent  for  him  to  London  to  discourse 
with  him  about  it;  particularly  concerning  the 
re-ordaining  of  such  as  were  ordained  by  presby- 
ters. Upon  mature  deliberation  he  declared  that 
he  could  not  submit  to  it :  and  drew  up  his  rea- 
sons at  large.  But  he  was  much  for  occasional 
conformity,  as  a  token  of  charity  towards  those 
whom  we  cannot  statedly  join  with.  In  1691  he 
entered  into  his  new  place  of  worship — and  caus- 
ed it  to  be  written  on  the  walls  "  That  it  was  built 
not  for  a  faction  or  party,  but  for  promoting  repent- 
ance, and  faith  in  communion  with  all  that  love  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity,''^  And  in  speaking 
of  the  glory  of  the  church  in  the  latter  times,  he 
used  to  say,  "  When  God  shall  repair  its  breach- 
es and  build  it  up,  the  subtilties  of  the  schools, 
and  many  canons  of  councils,  and  customs  of 
old,  will  be  laid  aside  ;  and  a  great  simplicity  in 
things  of  faith  and  worship  will  be  owned  and 
practised.     No  more  conditions  shall  be  made  for 


*  Ib.  466.  (from  Howe's  Sermon,  Works.  Vol.  ii.  474.) 


285 

the  communion  of  churches  than  Christ  has  made 
for  communion  with  him,^^"^ 

Joseph  Alleine,  authour  of  that  celebrated 
book,  entitled,  An  Alarm  to  the  Unconvertedj 
though  he  suffered  a  long  imprisonment  because 
he  would  not  cease  from  his  ministry  after  his 
ejectment,  yet  "  often  attended  the  worship  of 
the  parish  churches,  and  encouraged  his  people 
to  do  the  same."t 

Anthony  Burgess,  a  member  of  the  West- 
minster Assembly,  "  after  his  ejectment,  lived  in 
a  very  cheerful  and  pious  manner,  frequenting 
and  encouraging  the  ministry  of  the  conforming 

clergyman."! 

George  Hopkins,  himself  a  Presbyterian,  after 
his  ejectment  "  frequented  the  parish  church, 
with  his  family ;  received  the  holy  communion, 
and  did  all  things  required  of  him  as  a  lay  mem- 
ber of  the  church  of  England."^ 

The  reader  must  not  suppose  that  these  are  all 
the  instances  which  can  be  quoted.  They  are  taken 
from  a  much  larger  list  now  before  me ;  and  are 
given  merely  as  a  sample  of  the  views,  feehngs, 
and  practice,  which  prevailed  among  the  English 
Puritans  at  and  near  the  time  of  the  Westminster 
x\ssembly.     They  furnish  an  index  to  the  pub- 


*  Ib.  155, 156.        t  IB.  211.        %  IB.  350.        h  1b.  393. 


.  286 

lick  mind  and  habits.  The  persons  to  whom 
they  relate  may  be  considered,  like  the  As- 
sembly itself,  as  a  sort  of  committee  reflect- 
ing the  light,  and  reporting  the  judgment, 
of  evangelical  England.  They  were  no  crea- 
tures of  faction.  They  Avere  neither  obstinate 
in  peculiarities,  nor  yet  "  driven  about  by  every 
wind  of  doctrine."  In  "  malice,"  they  were  in- 
deed "  children ;"  but  in  "  understanding"  they 
were  "  men."  Such  men,  that  there  was  hard- 
ly an  individual  among  them  of  whom  Nature, 
and  Nature  Christianized,  might  not  '"  stand  up 
and  say  to  all  the  world,  this  was  a  m4n!"  They 
were  men  of  superiour  talent,  of  high  scholarship, 
intimately  acquainted  with  the  whole  body  of 
Christian  theology  and  history.  They  were  deeply 
versed  in  the  Scriptures.  They  gave  their  days 
and  nights  to  the  study  of  the  sacred  volumes. 
They  bowed  implicitly  to  the  authority  of  God  ; 
but  would  allow^  no  other  "  lord  of  their  con- 
science." With  all  their  meekness  and  submission 
to  the  "  higher  poAVers"  they  were  perfectly  in- 
tractable on  the  capital  points  of  faith  and  duty. 
Neither  ecclesiastical  nor  secular  authority  ;  no 
bishops  nor  dukes ;  no  king  nor  parliament  ; 
neither  flattery  nor  threats ;  preferment  nor  penal- 
ties, could  move  them  here.  Yet  with  this  ada- 
mantine firmness  in  essentials,  they  were  gentle 


287 

and  pliant  in  secondary  things.  For  the  "  answer 
of  a  good  conscience,"  they  "  took  joyfully  the 
spoiling  of  their  goods ;  enduring  grief'  to  prose- 
cutions, fines,  disgrace,  poverty,  hunger,  cold, 
bonds,  banishment.  Yet,  under  this  accumula- 
tion of  sorrows,  enough,  one  would  suppose,  to 
chill  every  warm  feeling  of  the  heart,  they  were 
full  "  of  life  and  love  ;"  they  contended  for  com- 
munion with  all  Christian  churches,  even  with 
that  church  whose  rulers  were  then  oppressing 
them !  Christians,  look  at  this  fact.  Remember 
it  was  these  men,  and  such  as  these,  who  framed 
the  Westminster  confession ;  and  say,  upon  your 
responsibility  before  God,  whether  the  construc- 
tion which  shuts  church- communion  out  of  their 
doctrine  of  the  communion  of  saints  can  possibly 
be  correct  ?  It  is  certainly  true — these  pages  shew 
it,  that  much  aversion  from  communion,  espe- 
cially with  the  establishment,  was  to  be  found, 
after  the  Bartholomew-act,  in  some  ministers 
and  congregations.  But  was  it  general  ?  Was  it 
not  chiefly  among  "  gathered  churches  ?"*  Was  it 

*  "  Gathered"  churches  were  formed  by  drawing  away  njembers  from 
the  parish-churches,  even  where  the  ministry  was  exemplary,  and  the 
ministrations  edifying.  The  effect  was  worthy  of  the  cause.  Chris- 
tian was  pitted  against  Christian.  Heart-burnings  necessarily  follow- 
ed. Love  sunk  as  Jealousy  rose:  and  when  sinful  passions  embittered 
communion,  it  wa«!  naturally  contracted  within  '^ther  limits  than  those 
diced  by  Christian  character.    This  culling  system  did  not  confine  its 

37 


.288 

considered  as  conformable  to  Christian  princi- 
ple ?  As  obedience  to  Christ  ?  As  a  solid  and  pre- 
eminent part  of  a  reformation-testimony  ?  Or  as 
the  very  reverse  ?  Did  not  the  concurring  judg- 
ment of  the  beat,  wisest,  holiest,  boldest,  most 
experienced  advocates  of,  and  sufferers  for,  the 
truth,  lament  it,  condemn  it,  resist  it?  Did  they 
not  deplore  its  progress  as  the  triumph  of  petty 
strifes  over  gospel  unity  ?  As  a  conspiracy  of  pride 
and  ignorance  to  lay  waste  the  kingdom  of  God 
under  pretext  of  defending  it  ?  Open  their  vo- 
lumes and  answer. 

The  spirit  of  Catholick  fellowship  flourished, 
amid  suffering,  on  the  continent  also.  The 
''  burning  fiery  furnace"  kindled  anew,  tried  and 
purified  the  churches  of  France!  but  the  "smell 
of  fire"  passed  not  upon  those  garments  which 
they  wore  as  followers  of  the  Son  of  God,  All 
that  they  endured  from  Papal  perfidy  was  much 
too  little  to  pervert  their  judgment  or  poison  their 
affections  on  the  subject  of  fraternal  charity.    Let 

ble-sing;^  to  England.  It  has  been  no  uncommon  thing  for  a  minister 
to  be  sent,  on  a  long  jonrney,  to  preach  to  two  or  three  individuals  in 
the  midst  of  a  district  Avliere  pure  gospel  was  established  ;  and  to  set 
about  the  business  of  "  gathering ;"  i.  e.  to  excite  discontent  and  de- 
sertion at  the  hazard,  in  many  instances,  of  so  dividing  the  Christian 
strength  of  the  district,  as  that,  in  a  short  time,  it  might  be  destitute  of 
the  gospel  altogether.  If  "  the  Prince  of  the  Devils"  ever  relax  his 
sternness,  he  cannot  but  smile  at  the  dexterity  with  which  his  work  if 
fuequently  performed,  and  hits  interest  promoted,  by  Christian  hands. 


289 

them  speak  for  themselves  through  their  publick 
organ,  the  great  John  Claude.  In  a  work  which 
received  their  official  sanction,  he  says,  *"  The 
points  which  divide  us,"  -(Papists  and  Protes- 
tants,) "  are  points  neitiier  of  simple  discipline, 
as  that  for  which  Victor  bishop  of  Rome  sepa- 
rated his  church  from  those  of  Asia,  which  cele- 
brated Easter  on  the  14th  day  of  the  moon — nor 
simply  scholastick  questions  which  consist  in 
terms  far  removed  from  the  knowledge  of  the 
people  ;  as  that  which  is  called  trkim  capitulo- 
rum,  which  excited  so  many  troubles  in  the  time 
of  the  emperour  Justinian  and  pope  Vigilius — 
nor  simple  personal  interests,  as  in  the  schisms  of 
the  antipopes — nor  crimes  nor  accusations  pure- 

*  Chacun  sail  quels  sont  les  points  qui  nous  divisent ;  que  ce  ne  sont 
ni  ties  points  do  simple  discipline,  coranie  celui  ponr  lequel  Victor 
Evesque  de  Rome  sepava  son  Eglise  de  celles  d'  Asie  qui  celebroient 
la  Pasque  le  quatorzieme  jour  de  la  lune — ni  simplenient  des  questions 
d'ecole,  qui  ne  consistent  qu'en  des  termes  eloignez  de  la  connoissance 
du  peuple ;  comme  celle  qu'on  appelle  trium  capitulorum,  qui  excita 
tant  de  troubles  du  terns  de  1'  Empereur  Justinien,  et  du  Pope  Vigili- 
us— ni  des  simples  inteiets  personnels ;  tels  qu'on  les  a  vus  dans  les 
schismes  des  Antipapes — ni  des  crimes  ou  des  accusations  puremeijt 
personelles  ;  comme  dans  le  schisme  des  Donatistes — ni  mesrae  une  cor- 
ruption generale  de  mceurs ;  bien  qu'eUe  fust  tres  grande  dans  le  Clerg^ 
du  tems  de  nos  peres.  Les  articles  qui  nous  separent  sont  des  points 
qui,  selon  nous,  trouble  essenciellement  la  foy  par  laquelle  nous  sora- 
mesunis  a  Jesus  Christ— des  points  qui  alterent  essenciellement  le  culte 
que  nous  devons  a  Dieu ;  qui  gastent  essenciellement  les  sources  de  nos- 
tra Justification  ;  et  qui  corrompent  les  moyens  soit  interieurs,  so'ii  ex- 
terieurs,  de  nous  acquerir  la  grace  et  la  gloire.    En  un  mot ;  ce  ??ont 


.290 

\y  personal,  as  in  the  schism  of  the  Donatists— 
nor  even  a  general  corruption  of  manners,  al- 
though it  was  very  great  in  the  Clergy  during  the 
time  of  our  fathers.  The  articles  which  separate 
us  are  points  which,  in  our  view,  trouble  essen- 
tially the  faith  whereby  we  are  united  to  Jesus 
Christ — points  which  alter,  essentially,  the  wor- 
ship we  owe  to  God  ;  which  damage,  essentially, 
the  sources  of  our  justification;  and  which  cor- 
rupt the  means,  internal  and  external,  of  obtain- 
ing both  grace  and  glory.  In  a  word,  they  are 
points  which  we  believe  to  be  altogether  incom- 
patible with  salvation  ;  and  which,  consequently, 
do  not  permit  us  to  give  the  title  or  concede  the 
quality  of  a  true  church  of  Jesus  Christ  to  a 
party  which  is  confirmed  in  their  profession  and 
practice ;  and  aims  at  compelling  us  to  the  same 
thing. 

"  I  acknowledge  that  our  controversies  are  not 
all  of  such  importance.  There  are,  without 
doubt,  some  of  less  weight  and  force  ;  on  which 


des  points  que  nous  croyons  entierement  incorapatibles  avec  la  salut : 
et  qui,  par  contequent,  nous  empechent  de  pouvoir  donner  le  titre  ou 
la  qualit€  de  vraye  Eglise  de  Jesus  Christ  aune  party  qui  s'est  affinny 
dans  leur  profession,  et  dans  leur  pratique ;  et  qui  nous  a  volu  contrain- 
dre  a  la  mesme  chose.  J'avoue  qu'on  ne  peut  dire  que  nos  controverses 
soient  toutes  de  cette  importance:  il-y-en  a,  sans  doute,  qui  sont  de 
moindre  poids  et  de  moindre  force,  sur  lesquelle.'  il  etoit  bon  de  se  re- 
former, raais  qui  pourtant  n'eassent  pas  pu  donner  seules  un  juste  si? 


291 

reformation  were  desirable;  but  which, neverthe- 
less, could  not,  of  themselves,  furnish  a  just  cause 
of  separation.  I  place  in  this  rank  the  question 
about  the  Limbus^  of  the  ancient  fathers — that 
of  the  local  descent  of  Jesus  Christ  into  hell- 
that  of  the  distinction  between  presbyters  and 
bishops  by  divine  right — that  of  the  observation 
of  Leiit;  and  some  others  of  the  same  sort;  where 
we  readily  perceive  there  was  errour  and  super- 
stition to  correct ;  but  ivhich  ivere  not  sufficient  to 
cause  a  rupture  of  communion :  Accordingly  it 
was  not  for  such  things  that  our  fathers  quitted 
the  church  of  Rome." 


jet  de  separation.  Je  mets  en  ce  rang  la  question  du  Limbe  des  anciens 
Peres — celle  de  la  descente  locale  de  Jesus  Christ  aux  Enfers — celle 
de  la  distinction  des  Prestres  et  des  Evesques  de  droit  divin — celle  de 
I'observation  dun  Careme;  et  quelques  autres  de  cette  nature,  ou  Ton 
voit  bien  qu'il-y-avoit  de  I'erreur  et  de  la  superstition  a  corriger; 
mais  qui  n'alloient  pas  jusqu'  a  pouvoir  causer  une  rupture  de  commu- 
nion. Aussi,  n'est  ce  pas  pour  ces  sortes  de  choses  que  nos  Peres  ont 
nuitte  1'  Eglise  de  Rome,  &:c. 

CtAUDE.  Defense  de  la  Reformation^  p.  210.  4to.  1673. 
*  A  state  of  saints  who,  before  the  coming  of  Christ,  had  departed 
this  life  :  being  neither  hell,  nor  heaven,  nor  purgatory;  but  without 
the  sense  of  pain  supposed  in  the  first  and  last ;  and  without  the  fruition 
of  the  blessedness  belonging  to  the  second,  was  believed  in  by  the 
church  of  Rome  under  the  name  of  Limbus  patrum  ;  into  which  she 
teaches  that  *^'hrist,  after  his  passion,  literally  descended  ;  end  by  his 
preaching  there,  delivered  the  souls  of  the  Fathers  thus  detained.t 

t  Catechismus  Bomanus  ex  decreto  concilii  Tridentini,  et 
Pif,v.l596.  p.  49.  12mo. 


0-)QC 


92 

What  think  you,  reader,  of  this  declaration  on 
the  part  of  the  French  churches  in  1672,  only  a 
few  years  before  they  were  to  pour  out  their 
blood  afresh  as  martyrs  to  the  truth  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  ?  Does  it  bear  any  resemblance  to  our  sec- 
tarianism ?  Has  it  any  thing  in  common  with 
those  maxims  of  disunion  which  put  us  apart 
and  render  us  mutually  cold,  suspicious,  hostile  ? 

If  this  be  staggering,  what  shall  we  say  to  a 
publick  deed  of  the  church  of  Scotland  nearly 
forty  years  later,  placing  church-communion  ex- 
plicitly upon  principles  common  to  the  Reform- 
ed Churches  ?  It  is  an  act  of  her  General  Assem- 
bly, entitled,  "  Act  concerning  the  receiving  of 
strangers  into  church- communion^  and  baptizing 
their  children ;"  and  runs  as  follows : 

"  The  General  Assembly  considering  that  all 
due  encouragement  ought  to  be  given  to  persons 
educated  in  the  protestant  churches,  who  have 
come,  or  may  come,  to  reside  in  this  country, 
and  may  incline  to  join  in  communion  with  this 
church  ;  Therefore  they  hereby  recommend  to 
all  ministers,  in  whose  parishes  any  such  stran- 
gers may  happen  to  reside,  to  shew  all  tender- 
ness to  them  when  they  come  to  desire  the  bene- 
fit of  sealing  ordinances  :  And  if  such  strangers, 
being  free  of  scandal,  and  professing  their  faith  in 
CJhrist  and  obedience  to  him,  shall  desire  bap- 


293 

tism  to  their  children,  ministers  shall  cheerfully 
comply  with  their  desire  in  administrating  the 
sacrament  of  baptism  to  their  children,  upon  the 
parents  engaging^  to  educate  them  in  the  fear  of 
God,  and  knowledge  of  the  principles  of  the  Re- 
formed Protestant  religion."* 

Let  us  analyze  this  act. 

It  was  passed  for  the  purpose  of  receiving 
'^  strangers  into  church-communion  ;"  they  co7i- 
iinuing  strangers,  and  not  accounting  themselves 
plenary  members  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  For 
about  the  reception  of  a  person  wishing  to  be- 
come such  a  member,  and  giving  due  satisfaction 
as  to  his  principles  and  character,  there  could  be 
no  scruple  in  her  ministers ;  and  no  necessity  of 
-an  act  of  the  General  Assembly  to  secure  due 
"  tenderness."  Men  are  not  apt  to  be  harsh  in 
their  treatment  of  decent  applicants  for  admis- 
sion into  their  church. 

It  contemplated  and  provided  for  the  reception 
of  such  strangers  into  habitual  communion.  For 
it  distinctly  specifies  their  residing  in  the  country 
as  strangers  ;  and  the  probability  of  their  having 
several  children  to  offer  in  baptism  ;  and  says  no- 
thing about  the  term  of  their  residence  :  all  which 
puts  their  case  out  of  the  limits  of  extraordinary 
and  transient  fellowship. 

*  Acts  oithe  General  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  May,  ITIf , 
p.  22,  23, 


•   294. 

In  order  to  this  regular,  habitual,  church-coii]» 
munion,  it  does  not  require  of  these  strangers  an 
approbation  of  all  or  any  'peculiarities  in  the 
church  of  Scotland^  but  simply  a  credible  chris- 
tian character,  and  a  promise,  when  the  com- 
munion was  in  the  form  of  baptism,  to  educate 
their  children,  not — be  it  noticed — not  according 
to  the  standards  of  the  church  of  Scotland;  but 
according  to  the  principles  of  the  Reformed  Pror 
testant  religion  ! — Hence  it  appears, 

1.  That  this  act  was  passed  for  the  purpose  of 
facilitating  communion  with  strangers  who  did 
not  even  pretend  to  join  the  church  of  Scotland 
as  complete  members. 

2.  That  the  church  of  Scotland,  at  this  time, 
required  nothing  as  a  term  of  full  communion 
with  her,  but  what  was  common  to  "  the  princi- 
ples of  the  Reformed  Protestant  religion."     And 

3.  That  a  member  of  any  reformed  church  in 
any  part  of  the  world,  not  acting  unworthy  of 
Ms  profession,  was  entitled,  upon  that  ground,  to 
an  equal  participation  with  her  own  members  in 
ber  most  sacred,  i.  e.  in  her  sealing  ordinances. 

Here  is  now  the  church  of  Scotland^  the  only 
national  church  upon  earth  adhering  to  the  West- 
minster confession  ;  and  which  had  adhered  to  it 
fjom  the  beginning — the  very  church  from  which 
\?e  have  sprung  ;  and  in  that  state  in  which  we 


g4ory  to  have  sprung  from  her,  giving  to  the  world 
her  official  construction  of  the  article  concerning 
the  "  communion  of  saints ;"  giving  it  freely  and 
frankly  ;  without  passion,  or  pressure,  or  party- 
feeling  :  and  giving  it  in  flat  contradiction  to  the 
construction  of  those  who  for  the  last  eighty  years 
have  claimed  to  be  her  genuine  sons ;  but  who 
were  under  the  pressure,  if  not  of  passion,  yet 
certainly  of  party.* 

Who  is  likely  to  be  right?  Christians!  as  in 
the  sight  of  God,  judge  ye  ! 

On  this  particular  point,  viz.  "  the  communion 
of  saints^''  the  argument  is  conceived  to  have 
fully  made  out  the  three  following  propositions — 

1.  That  the  phrase  "  comrtiunion  of  saints" 
was  originally  intended  to  express  "church-com- 
munion ;"  and  was  understood  to  express  it  by 
all  parts  of  the  Christian  church  down  to  the 
time  of  the  Westminster  assembly. 

2.T  hat  the  very  terms  of  the  article  so  entitled 
in  their  confession,  as  well  as  collateral  ex- 
pressions, prove  that  it  must  be  understood  in 
the  then  established  sense,  and  cannot  admit  of 
any  other. 

3.  That  it  not  only  continued  to  be  so  under- 

*  The  reader  will  remember  that  this  work  is  immediately  designed 
for  churches  which  have  descended,  though  by  separation,  from  the 
vJ\^\xxc)\i)i  Scotland. 

38 


296 

Mood  privately  and  publickly  ;  by  individuals  and 
by  churches  adopting  that  confession,  for  nearly, 
if  not  quite,  a  century  later;  but  that  the  opinion 
and  practice  of  the  best  and  holiest  men  who 
were  contemporary  with,  or  flourished  shortly 
after,  that  memorable  assembly,  coincided  per^ 
fectly  with  the  doctrine  of  this  volume. 

It  isnot  necessary  to  go  into  further  details. 
The  preceding  pages  are  believed  to  have  shewn, 
that  the  communion  for  which  they  plead  is  en- 
joined in  the  word  of  God — ^was  understood  to  be 
so  enjoined  by  the  Apostolick  and  primitive 
church — was  acted  upon  under  that  persuasion — 
was  contended  for  in  opposition  to  every  sort  of 
sectaries — was  asserted,  and  the  doctrine  of  it 
inserted,  in  the  briefest  summary  of  faith  ever 
current  in  the  churches,  the  apostles'  creed — was 
maintained  at  the  revival  of  the  cause  of  God 
and  truth  at  the  Reformation — was  practised  to 
the  greatest  extent  in  the  best  of  churches  in 
the  best  of  times — was  cordially  received  by 
that  venerable  representation  of  evangelical  in- 
terests, the  assembly  of  divines  at  Westminster 
— is  in  perfect  unison  with  the  known  convictions 
and  conduct  of  the  most  glorious  champions  of 
the  cross  whom  England  ever  saw — was  not  only 
received,  but  is  formally,  explicitly,  and  fully^ 
maintained  in  their  confession  of  faith— -has  been 


297 

reasserted  and  vindicated  by  the  church  of  Scot- 
land^ thirty  years  before  the  Secession — and  stands^ 
at  this  hour,  a  conspicuous  part  of  the  solemn, 
pubUck,  profession  of  churches  which,  on  both 
sides  of  the  Atlantick,  have  originated  from  her. 

Were  it  safe  to  reason  from  profession  to  con- 
duct, the  inference  from  these  premises  would  be, 
that  all  who  have  adopted  the  Westminster  con- 
fession of  faith  as  the  confession  of  their  own 
faith,  would  most  cordially  reciprocate  the  best  of- 
fices of  Christian  love ;  would  join  together  in 
Sweet  communion ;  would  hail  as  a  brother,  and 
welcome  to  their  sacramental  table,  every  one 
who  bears  the  image  of  their  glorified  Lord. 

But  what  are  the  facts  ?  Not  only  is  the  Catho- 
lick  church  divided,  but  many  even  of  those  parti- 
cular churches  which  are  thus  united  in  the  same 
faith,  and  organized  under,  substantially,  the  same 
order,  stand  aloof  from  each  other  as  if  they  w^ere 
"strangers  and  foreigners,"  and  not  "fellow- 
citizens  with  the  saints  and  of  the  household  of 
God."  In  some  of  them,  at  least,  the  very  fact 
of  belonging  as  a  member  to  any  other  Christian 
denomination,  is  a  regular  and  almost  insuperable 
obstacle  to  communion.  If  a  Christian,  however, 
his  character  and  conversation  may  adorn  the 
doctrine  of  God  his  Saviour,  should  happen,  in 
the  course  of  providence,  to  be  present  at  one  of 


298 

thefF^^ -Solemn  feasts,"  and  should  desire,  with 
them,  to  ''  pay  his  vows  unto  the  Lord,"  he  is  re- 
pulsed. "  Why  ?  Are  not  his  professed  principles 
the  same  with  your  own?"  "The  very  same.'' 
"  Does  he  not  give  as  satisfactory  proofs  of '  living 
by  faith  upon  the  Son  of  God,'  as  are  given  by 
those  whom  you  invite,  welcome,  urge  to  your 
sacramental  fellowship  ?"  "  It  cannot  be  denied." 
But  identity  of  principle  and  a  life  of  faith  upon 
the  Son  of  God  are  Icmie  recommendations !  It 
is  not  enough  that  he  is  a  Christian^  he  must  also 
be  a  sectarian — to  follow  Christ  goes  for  nothing, 
unless  he  follow  us:  And  so,  with  the  traits  of 
his  master's  image  strong  upon  him,  he  is  shut 
out  among  the  profane  ! ! 

On  the  other  hand,  when  members  of  these 
churches  have  an  opportunity  of  shewing  forth 
the  Lord's  death  in  a  church  which  wears  his 
name,  though  it  wear  not  theirs  ;  and  breathes 
his  spirit,  though  it  repeat  not  their  watch-word, 
nor  keep  their  countersign ;  they  wdll  not,  when 
asked,  touch  his  sacred  memorials.  "  This  chin  re- 
membrance o/'me,"  weighs  upon  their  consciences 
no  where  but  in  their  own  precincts ;  and  they 
will  rather  withhold  their  testimony  to  his  dying 
love,  than  recognise  their  union  with  fellow-be- 
lievers all  whose  feelings  and  habits  have  not 
been  melted  down  and  amal2:amated  with  their 


299 

own  peculiarities  in  the  crucible  ol  party-zeal. 
Should  they,  however,  at  anytime,  break  through 
these  restrictions — should  they  mingle  their  tears 
of  thankfulness,  and  their  hymns  of  praise,  with 
those  who  having  "  obtained  like  precious  faith 
with  themselves,"  are  putting  their  seal  to  their 
privileges  and  their  hope  at  the  table  of  their 
common  Lord, — they  become  objects  of  suspi- 
cion; their  conduct  is  reproved  as  disorderly; 
the  communion  which  they  have  held  is  pro- 
nounced offensive ;  and  their  brethren  become  as 
alarmed  and  indignant,  as  if  their  honouring  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  his  atknowledged  ordinances 
and  members  were  a  real  scandal — an  "  iniquity 
to  be  punished  by  the  judges! !'' 

Nay,  to  ^uch  a  length  is  this  fastidiousness 
carried  in  certain  churches,  that  the  simple  hear- 
ing of  the  gospel,  from  the  mouth  of  the  most 
faithful  minister  who  happens  not  to  be  within 
their  own  circle,  is  accounted  an  ecclesiastical 
crime;  and  a  sufficient  ground  of  church-censure! 
And  should  such  a  minister  be,  on  any  occasion^ 
admitted  in  ministerial   communion  to  one  of 
their  pulpits,  however  honoured  he  may  have 
been  of  God — I  tremble  to  write  it — Blasphemy 
itself  could  hardly  excite  a  greater  ferment ! !  It 
would  be  vain  to  deny  the  accuracy  of  this  state- 
ment. It  is  the  truth,  the  plain  truth,  and  nothing 


300 

but  the  truth.  The  facts  which  justify  it  are  no- 
torious to  the  whole  world. 

Such  being  the  relative  situation  of  several 
churches,  comprising  many  congregations,  and  an 
immense  multitude  of  individuals,  it  is  natural 
to  inquire  into  the  history  of  so  strange  a  pheno* 
menon. 

It  may  be  laid  down  as  a  general  rule  with  re- 
gard to  human  disagreements,  that  the  causes 
which  produce  them  are  very  different  from  the 
reasons  which  are  assigned  for  their  vindication: 
It  being  nothing  uncommon,  with  our  sinful  and 
inconsistent  race,  to  father  upon  Conscience  the 
offspring  of  Passion :  and  to  clothe,  with  the 
sanctions  of  religion,  whatever  accords  with  the 
power  of  habit,  or  flatters  the  vanity  of  name. 
But  supposing  the  present  case  to  be  an  excep- 
tion: that  the  churches  have,  in  this  instance, 
escaped  the  common  infirmity ;  and  that  the  «/- 
hged  are  the  rea/ causes  of  their  distant,  not  to  say 
hostile,  deportment  toward  each  other ;  it  is  im- 
possible, considering  the  scriptural  doctrine  and 
their  own  concurrent  faith  concerning  the  unity 
of  the  body  of  Christ,  it  is  impossible  for  a  sound 
mind  to  be  convinced  by  any  thing  short  of  de- 
monstration, that  their  actual  state  is  either  pleas- 
higto  God  or  beneficial  to  man.  Nor  is  this  afi 
unreasonable  demand — Forj 


301 

Every  church  refusing  to  hold  communion 
with  another,  does,  by  that  fact,  declare  herself 
to  be  too  pure  for  such  communion ;  i.  e.  that  such 
communion  would  contaminate  her  in  the  eyes 
of  her  God,  and  bring  down  upon  her  the  tokens 
of  his  displeasure.  It  needs  no  proof  that  a  church 
must  be  very  sure  of  her  own  pretensions  be- 
fore she  venture  upon  such  high  and  danger- 
ous ground — Very  sure  that  the  mantle  of  her 
excluding  zeal  does  not  cover  offences  against 
the  Lord  her  God  quite  as  provoking  as  those 
w^hich  she  charges  upon  others — that  there  is  no 
place  for  the  Jewish  proverb.  Physician!  heal 
thyself^  or  for  the  heathen  aphorism. 


-mutato  nomine  de  te 


Fabula  narratur — * 

—that  she  does  not  wink  at  abuses  in  her  own 
members,  which  she  laments  and  reprobates  in 
her  neighbours.  It  is  the  more  necessary  for  her 
to  be  sure  of  her  own  sanctity,  as  the  very  as- 
sumption of  a  censorial  power  over  her  Christian 
sisters  invites  the  most  unsparing  scrutiny;  and 
no  honourable  a  mark  is  affixed  by  Truth  itself, 
to  those  who,  regardless  of  their  own  faults,  say, 
Stand  by  thyself;  come  not  near  me ;  for  lam  holier 
Hian  thou! 


*  — Change  but  the  name^ 
Th©  chctracier^s  yowr  own,- 


302 

The  refusal  of  one  evangelical  church  to  hold 
communion  with  another  is,  in  appearance  at 
least,  an  offence  against  the  visible  unity  of  the 
body  of  Christ,  and  against  his  commandment 
to  cultivate  that  unity  at  the  expense  of  much 
inconvenience,  and  even  of  many  sacrifices.  Dif- 
ference of  denomination,  it  must  be  owned,  does 
not  necessarily  involve  this  consequence:  but  ex- 
clusive communions,  founded  on  that  difference, 
it  will  be  difficult  to  acquit  from  the  imputation.. 

In  fine— To  refuse  communion  with  a  church 
or  with  her  members  is,  in  effect,  to  unchurch 
her,  and  to  declare  that  she  is  no  church,  and 
that  her  members  are  no  followers,  of  Jesus 
Christ.  At  least  it  is  a  declaration  that  they  are 
so  very  corrupt  as  to  render  their  communion  un- 
Jmvful.  Now  such  a  declaration,  whether  express- 
ed or  implied,  can  be  viewed  as  nothing  less,  on 
the  part  of  those  who  make  it,  than  an  excommu- 
nication in  disguise — but  a  disguise  so  thin  that  it 
might  as  well  be  dropped.  For  what  is  excom- 
munication (the  heaviest  penalty  in  the  kingdom 
of  God)  but  a  judicial  exclusion  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  church  on  account  of  the  unworthi- 
ness  of  the  excommunicated ;  i.  e.  the  imlaivfuhiess 
of  holding  communion  with  them?  If  then  you  re- 
fuse communion  with  a  church  or  with  individuals, 
justifying  your  refusal  by  the  plea  of  their  corrupt- 


303 

ness^  your  conduct  is  a  virtual  denial  of  their  visi° 
ble  Christianity;  and,  having  already  the  sub- 
stance, wants  nothing  but  the  form,  of  an  exconi- 
municating  act.     This  consequence,  viz.  the  vir- 
tual unchurching  and  excommunicating  all  the 
churches  and  people  of  God  upon  earth  with 
whom  we  refuse  communion,  is  so  dreadful  that 
every  Christian  heart  shrinks  from  it  with  fear 
and  horrour.     It  is,  therefore,  disow^ned  and  re- 
jected by  the  most  strenuous  opponents  of  catho- 
lick  fellowship.     We  are  glad  to  acquit  their  in- 
tentions; but  cannot  so  easily  acquit  their  argu- 
ment^ or  their  practice.    They  shut  out  from  their 
communion  other  Christians  and  churches :  what 
is  this  but  excommunication?  what  more  can 
they  do  to  the  blasphemer  and  the  profligate  ? 
This  draws  deep.     For  the  scriptural  doctrine, 
common    to   Protestant   Christendom,    is,   that 
"  heinous  violations  of  the  law  of  God  in  prac- 
tice; and  such  errours  in  principle  as  unhinge 
the  Christian  profession,  are  the  only  scandals 
for  which   the    sentence   of  excommunication 
should  be  passed."*   Where  it  is  inflicted,  either 
formally  or  practically,  for  less  weighty  reasons, 
for  secular   ends,  or  through  the  influence  of 
party-passions,   there  can  be  but  one  opinion 

*  Discip.  of  the  Asso.  Rff.  Church,  B.  ii.  ch.  vj.  Title,  "  of  excgm- 
miiuication." 

S9 


304 

among  Christians  who  are  not  infatuated  by  their 
own  share  in  the  sin — it  is  a  deed  which  the 
Lord  our  God  will  never  ratify  in  heaven  ;  and 
which  owes  to  his  marvellous  forbearance  what- 
ever  immunity  it  enjoys  from  prompt  and  ex- 
emplary punishment  on  earth. 

Seeing,  therefore,  that  the  refusing  our  com- 
munion to  other  Christians  when  it  is  desired, 
and  the  decHning  theirs  when  it  is  offered,  in- 
volve claims  of  great  peril,  if  not  of  great  pre- 
sumption— are  an  apparent  violation  of  that  uni- 
ty which  our  master  has  commanded  us  to  main- 
tain— and  treat  many  members  of  the  household 
of  faith  like  open  unbelievers ;  virtually  excom- 
municating them,  as  if  they  were  blots  and  scan- 
dals to  their  holy  caUing — Seeing  these  things, 
it  becomes  us  to  pause:  to  review  our  proceed- 
ings as  those  "  who  shall  give  apcount:"  and  to 
be  thoroughly  satisfied,  by  an  honest  and  intelli- 
gent examination  of  the  word  of  God,  that  our 
reasons  shall  be  found  valid  and  ourselves  acquit- 
ted at  his  tribunal ;  lest  we  meet  with  the  rebuke 
of  those  who  "make  sad  the  hearts  which  he 
has  not  made  sad;"  and  instead  of  honouring 
and  comforting,  "smite  their  fellow-servants," 
with  the  aggravation  of  smiting  them  in  Bis 
name. 


305 
Part  III. — A  Review  of  Objections, 

What,  then,  are  the  objections  to  a  more  libe- 
ral communion  than  we  have  been  accustomed 
to  cherish  ?  What  are  those  imperative  considera- 
tions which,  apparently,  in  the  face  of  plain  scrip- 
tural injunction  of  our  own  solemn  profession ; 
and  of  dangers  enough,  one  would  suppose,  to 
appal  the  stoutest  heart,  do,  nevertheless,  for- 
hid  us  to  reciprocate  frank  and  cordial  fellow- 
ship with  all  acknovjledged  Christians  and  Chris- 
tian churches  ?  In  so  far  as  the  authour  can  dis- 
cover, they  are,  substantially,  the  following,  viz, 

"That  God  may  hold  communion  with  those 
with  whom  we  may  not — 

"  That  so  general  a  communion  as  this  plea 
inculcates,  would  prostrate  all  scriptural  distinc- 
tion between  the  precious  and  the  vile,  and  that 
salutary  discipline  by  which  the  house  of  God  is 
to  be  kept  from  pollution — 

"  That  it  involves  an  approbation  of  abuses 
and  corruptions  in  churches  with  which  it  is 
held  ;  and  thus  makes  us  partakers  of  other  men's 
sins — 

"  That  by  giving  publick  countenance  to 
churches  erroneous  or  corrupt,  it  destroys  the 
force,  or  at  least  shackles  the  freedom,  of  a  faith= 
ful  testimonv  to  Christ  and  his  truth — 


306 

"  That  it  not  only  diminishes  the  value,  but 
supersedes  the  necessity,  and  impeaches  the  pro- 
priety, of  all  that  service  which,  in  every  age, 
the  churches  of  God  have  rendered  to  '  pure  and 
undefiled  religion,'  by  their  judicial  confessions 
of  faith- — 

"That  as  communion  presupposes  and  is  found- 
ed upon  union,  it  is  a  contradiction  to  hold  com- 
munion with  churches  with  which  we  are  not 
united ;  and,  therefore,  that  all  such  communion 
is  inconsistent  with  distinct  ecclesiastical  orga- 
nization-— 

"  That  whatever  may  have  been  the  practice 
of  primitive  times,  the  state  of  the  church  is  so 
greatly  altered  as  to  make  the  imitation  of  them 
inexpedient,  if  not  impracticable,  now — 

"  That  w  hereas  the  sentiments  and  examples 
of  holy  men  and  evangelical  churches,  in  later 
days,  may  seem  to  thwart  the  strain  of  these  ob- 
jections, and  to  throw  their  advocates  into  the 
dilemma  of  either  aspersing  those  whom  they 
profess  to  venerate,  or  convicting  themselves  of 
schism,  all  such  sentiments  and  examples  were 
adapted  to  extraordinary  circumstances ,  and  are 
inapplicable  to  any  regular  settled  state — and 

"  That  all  Christians,  being  one  in  spirit,  the 
best  ends  of  their  communion  may  be  answered, 
in  their  present  state  of  separation,  wdthout  the 
evils  incident  to.  its  publick  extension." 


307 

If  there  are  other  objections  affecting  the  gene- 
ral question,  they  have  not  come  to  the  authour's 
knowledge,  nor  occurred  to  his  reflexions.  But 
if  these,  or  any  considerable  part  of  them,  are 
well  founded,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  his 
whole  preceding  argument  is  overthrown — that 
his  doctrine  labours  under  some  radical  fallacy — 
and  that  the  practice  which  has  grown  out  of  it 
at  New-  York  and  elsewhere,  has  given  just  of- 
fence, and  merits  severe  reprehension. 

Yet  plausible  as  they  are,  and  solid  as  they 
appear  to  many  honest  and  respectable  men,  it 
may  be  allowed,  without  the  imputation  of  arro- 
gance, to  try  their  soundness :  and,  long  as  they 
have  had  possession  of  the  popular  ear,  to  shew 
that  in  this,  as  in  other  instances,  the  popular  fa- 
vour has  been  unwisely  bestowed. 

Considering  the  very  great  difficulties  with 
^hich  they  would  press  us,  it  is  surprising  that 
not  one  of  them  is  so  much  as  noticed  in  the  word 
of  God!  If  the  communion  of  his  church  is  to 
be  so  circumscribed,  not  to  say  fastidious— If  the 
religious  intercourse  of  his  own  people  with 
each  other  is  so  materially  influenced  by  vari' 
ance  in  things  which  may  confessedly  stand  with 
the  substance  of  his  truth  and  the  power  of  his 
grace— if  Christians  of  diff*erent  name,  by  meet- 
ino;  at  the  table  of  their  Redeemer^  break  down 


308 

the  hedges  which  he  has  set  about  his  vineyard ; 
make  themselves  reciprocally  chargeable  with 
whatever  eiTOur  or  sin  may  be  found  in  their  re- 
spective denominations  ;  and  instead  of  building 
up,  destroy  his  kingdom — it  is  ^'  passing  strange" 
that  neither  their  master  nor  his  apostles  should 
have  cautioned  them  against  the  peril !  Nay,  that 
the  language  of  his  word  when  treating  of  this 
very  subject;  and  especially  when  rectifying 
abuses  and  settling  controversies,  should  be  ab- 
solutely silent  on  the  topics  of  objection ;  and 
rather  calculated  to  lead  Christians  into  mis- 
take !  For  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  while  their 
union,  love  and  fellowship,  as  members  of  His 
body,  are  inculcated  with  deep  solemnity  and 
enforced  by  awful  motives,  those  impediments 
to  communion,  so  formidable  in  our  eyes,  have 
not  even  a  place  among  the  inspired  discussions! 
Did  not  the  Lord  Jesus  foresee  them  ?  Were  not 
human  infirmities  and  passions  and  sins  the  same 
in  the  days  of  Paul  as  they  have  been  ever  since  ? 
Do  not  the  writings  of  this  wondrous  man,  and 
the  apostolick  history  by  Luke,  record  facts 
which  modern  opinion  and  practice — the  opinion 
and  practice  of  many  among  ourselves — the  spi- 
rit of  the  foregoing  objections,  would  consider  as 
not  only  warranting,  but  demanding,  separate 
eonnexionSj  and  interdicting  communion  between 


309 

their  members  ?  And  yet  did  either  Paul  or  tTie 
other  apostles  advise  or  countenance  any  such 
measure  ?  On  the  contrary,  while  we  seem  to 
dread  communion  between  all  those  who  "  call 
on  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  as  dangerous 
to  the  purity  of  his  church  and  the  answer  of  a 
good  conscience,  did  they  not  seem  to  dread  the 
disruption  of  it  as  inconsistent  with  her  unity,  as 
unfriendly  to  her  peace,  and  scandalous  to  her 
name?  And  this,  notwithstanding  objections 
which,  upon  the  principles  of  the  objectors,  were 
as  obvious  then  as  they  can  be  now  ?  Whence 
this  prodigious  difference  between  their  views 
^nd  ours  ?  Did  they  not  understand  the  interest 
of  the  church  ?  Did  they  not  regard  it  ?  Did  they 
leave  to  the  wisdom  of  these  latter  days  a  reme- 
dy for  evils  against  which  their  master  made  no 
provision  ?  and  commit  to  our  hands  the  finish- 
ing of  His  imperfect  work  ?  Or  in  very  deed  are 
the  objections  faulty  and  false  ?  This  is  more 
probable.  Let  us,  then,  weigh  them  in  the 
balances,  and  see  if  we  can  discover  wherein 
they  are  wanting. 

The  scope  of  this  treatise  being  to  shew  that 
we  are  bound  to  fellowship  with  those  whose 
"  fellowship  is  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ,"* 


*  h  John  1.  S, 


I.  The  first  objection  is  for  making  short  work 
with  the  whole  matter,  by  granting  the  premises 
and  denying  the  conckision— maintaining  that 
"  God  may  and  does  hold  communion  with  those 
with  whom  we  may  not :"  and,  therefore,  that 
the  whole  superstructure  of  church-communion, 
built  upon  the  foundation  of  communion  with 
him,  falls  to  the  ground. 

Such  an  objection  is  of  strange  hearing  in  Chris- 
tian ears  which  have  been  unaccustomed  to  it; 
and  may  be  treated  as  a  phantom  which  has  been 
raised  for  the  pleasure  of  laying  it  again.  But  it  is 
no  phantom — It  has  a  real  existence,  and  a  strong 
power  over  men  respectable  for  their  understand- 
ing, amiable  for  their  benevolence,  and  venerable 
for  their  piety.  It  was  urged  upon  the  authour 
many  years  ago,  by  an  excellent  Anti-Burgher 
minister,*  remarkable  for  the  cheerfulness  of  his 
temper  and  the  Catholicism  of  his  feelings.  The 
conversation  turned  upon  the  separation  of  the 
Burgher  and  Anti-Burgher  churches.  "  Do  you 
not  account  the  Burgher  churches  to  be  true 
churches  of  Jesus  Christ?"  ^  I  do.'  "  Do  you  not 
believe  that  the  gospel  of  Christ  is  purely  preach- 
ed there,  his  ordinances  scripturally  administered, 
iiis  people  edified,  and  his  presence  enjoyed?" 

*  The  late  Reverend  Mr.  Alicf,  of  Paisley, 


311 

'^  O  yes.'  "  Why,  then,  will  you  not  hold  commu- 
nion with  them  ?"  The  reply  was  in  the  very 
words  quoted,  *  God  may  hold  communion  with 
those  with  whom  we  may  not.'^  The  objection 
is,  then,  worthy  of  a  serious  examination. 

It  must  have  one  of  three  senses,  viz. 

Either  that  God  holds  secret  communion  with 
some  with  whom  his  people,  who  are  vitally 
united  to  Christ,  can  have  no  such  communion: 

Or,  That  God  holds  secret  communion  with 
«ome  with  whom  his  'professing  people  may  not 
hold  publick  communion : 

Or,  That  God  holds  publick  communion  with 
some  with  whom  his  church  may  not  hold  it. 

According  to  the^r^^  of  these  senses,  the  pro- 
position is  neither  sound  in  itself,  nor  relative  to 
the  argument. 

Not  sound  in  itself — God  holds  no  secret  com- 
munion with  an  unregenerated  man.  And  all 
regenerated  men  have,  in  virtue  of  union  with 
Christ  their  head,  both  union  and  communion 
with  each  other — union  and  communion  utterly 
independent  on  their  own  will ;  and  which  they 
can  neither  break  nor  avoid. 

Not  relative  to  the  argument — For  the  ques- 

»  The  same  principle  is  stated  more  at  length,  though  with  some 
confusion,  in  Wilson's  Defence  of  the  RefoTmation-principles  of  the 
chxcfch  of  Scotland,  p.  70.  1769. 

40 


312 

tionis  not  about  invisible  and  secret,  but  about 
visible  and  publick  communion. 

In  its  second  sense,  the  proposition  is  true ;  but 
not  more  applicable  than  in  the  first.  For  no  in- 
telligent Christian  will  admit  that  things  which 
are  an  absolute  secret  between  God  and  the  soul, 
can  be  a  rule  of  proceeding  to  his  church :  nor  is 
the  right  of  communion  with  her  ever  placed  on 
such  a  footing. 

In  the  third^  which  is  its  only  remaining  sense, 
viz.  that  "  God  holds  puhlick  communion  with 
some  with  whom  his  church  may  not,"  the  pro- 
position is,  indeed,  strictly  applicable;  but,  at 
the  same  time,  materially  incorrect. 

1 .  It  runs  directly  counter  to  the  strain  of  scrip* 
iural  authority. 

"  That  which  we  have  seen  and  heard,"  says 
John  the  beloved,  "  declare  we  unto  you,  that  ye 
also  may  have  fellowship  with  us :  and  truly  our 
fellowship  is  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ."* 

The  gospel,  according  to  this  apostle,  is  "  de- 
clared" with  a  view  of  conferring  upon  men  those 
blessed  privileges,  that  transcendently  valuable 
interest,  of  which  he  and  his  fellow-believers  had 
already  the  possession.  He  calls  it  "  fellowship ;" 

*  1  John,  1.  a 


313 

i.  e.  communion,  or  an  interest  "  common"  to  all 
concerned.  But  wherein  consists  its  value  ? 
What  renders  it  so  ineffably  desirable  and  glori- 
ous ?  This :  "  Our  fellowship,  our  communion," 
saith  the  apostle,  "  is  with  the  Father,  and  with 
his  Son  Jesus  Christ."  Now  if  our  communion 
with  God  is  a  sufficient  reason  for  inviting  others 
to  communion  with  us  ;  then  his  communion  with 
others  is  a  sufficient  reason  for  our  communion 
with  them.  For  our  invitation  must  be  address- 
ed to  believers  or  to  unbelievers.  If  to  believers, 
it  can  be  nothing  short  of  a  cordial  welcome  to 
participate  with  us  in  all  our  privileges  as  the 
"  sons  of  God ;"  and  so  the  apostle  has  settled 
the  question  of  the  whole  communion  which 
Christians  can  have  together ;  and  settled  it  ex- 
actly and  explicitly  upon  this  principle,  that  they 
have  communion  with  God.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  our  invitation  is  to  unbelievers ;  it  can 
mean  nothing  short  of  an  earnest  exhortation  to 
become  sharers  with  us,  by  faith,  in  all  that  fel- 
lowship which  flows  from  our  fellowship  with 
God.  And  would  it  not  be  singularly  inconsistent, 
thus  to  invite  unbelievers  upon  the  very  argument 
and  plea  that  "  our  communion  is  with  God ;" 
and  the  mortient  they  become  believers^  and  shew 
that  their  communion  also  is  with  God,  to  turn 
round  and  tell  them  that  communion  with  him  is 


314 

not  a  sufficient  warrant  for  communion  with  u's? 

Again ;  the  apostle  Paul  lays  upon  Christians 
the  following  injunction ;  "  Receive  ye  one  ano- 
ther as  Christ  also  received  us  to  the  glory  of 
God."* 

This  "  receiving"  can  be  interpreted  of  nothing 
but  of  their  embracing  each  other  in  all  holy  af- 
fection and  fellowship  ;  for  so  Christ  had  "  receiv- 
ed" them.  The  injunction  has  for  its  immediate 
object  the  repression  of  those  jealousies,  aliena- 
tions, and  divisions,  which  had  originated,  or 
were  likely  to  originate,  from  the  dispute  about 
meats  and  days  in  the  church  at  Rome.  But  the 
rule  is  general ;  and  has  decided, 

That  matters  which  destroy  not  communion 
with  Christ  are  not  to  destroy  the  communion  of 
Christians:   But 

That  when  one  Christian,  or  party  of  Chris- 
tians, sees  the  tokens  of  Christ's  approbation  and 
presence  with  another,  the  warrant  is  perfect, 
and  the  duty  imperative,  to  reciprocate  all  the 
offices  of  Christian  love,  with  a  kindness  and 
generosity  modelled  after  Christ's  example  to 
them  both.  If  this  does  not  import  a  command 
to  hold  communion,  church-communion,  with  all 
who  give  evidence  of  being  in  communion  with 
Christ ;  and  precisely  for  that  reason,  it  will  be 

*  Rora.  XV.  7, 


315 

difficult  to  find  a  commandment  in  the  Bible. 
"  There  is  no  cause,  therefore,"  says  Calvin  in 
his  commentary  on  the  preceding  verse,  "  there 
is  no  cause  for  a  man's  boasting  that  he  will  glo- 
rify God  in  his  own  way*  For  of  so  great  mo- 
ment in  God's  sight  is  the  unity  of  his  servants, 
that  he  will  not  permit  his  glory  to  sound  forth 
amidst  dissensions  and  strifes.  This  one  thought 
should  effectually  restrain  that  mad  passion  for 
contest  and  quarrel  which  fills  the  minds  of  ma- 
ny at  the  present  day."* 

2.  The  objection  is  subversive  of  all  church- 
communion  whatsoever. 

Visible  Christianity ;  i.  e.  a  profession  and  walk 
such  as  we  have  a  right  to  expect  from  the  dis- 
ciples of  Christ,  is  the  only  and  the  uncontested 
ground  of  ecclesiastical  fellowship. 

But  what  is  this  "  visible  Christianity  ?"  This 
"  profession  and  walk  of  Christ's  disciples  ?" 
Why  is  it  required?  And  what  is  its  use?  Is  it 
any  thing  else  than  the  external  etfect  and  indica- 
tion of  communion  with  God?  Is  it  of  any  other 
use  in  the  present  question  than  to  ascertain,  as 
far  as  can  be  ascertained  by  outward  evidence, 
that  its  possessors  are  the  people  of  God?  If, 
then,  communion  with  him — if  being  his  people, 

owned  of  him  as  such,  is  not,  of  itself,  a  suf- 

^^  ..  ,1 ,  ,  „ .1 ,  ^ ;  ...  „       — . —       .  ,._^.f_^-», ,^^. 

*  Calt.  Opp.  T.  vii,  p.  99. 


316 

licient  reason  for  our  communion  with  them  in 
those  ordinances  which  are  appointed  express- 
ly for  their  benefit,  there  can  be  no  church-com- 
munion at  all.  The  thing  is  impossible:  at  least 
it  is  impossible  in  the  church  of  God — What  com- 
munion, upon  different  principles,  there  may  be 
in  churches  oi  mart's  making,  is  another  question  ; 
but  a  question  which  it  were  profaneness  and  pol- 
lution so  much  as  to  agitate. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  conceding  that  God  holds 
visible  communion  with  some  with  whom  we 
may  not,  I  shall  reverse  the  position  ;  and  say, 
that  I  ought,  and  will,  and  shall,  as  I  have  oppor- 
tunity, hold  communion  with  all  who  have  com- 
munion with  God,  to  the  whole  extent  of  the 
proof  of  such  communion ;  and  account  it  my 
unutterable  privilege.  I  will  not  be  afraid  nor 
ashamed  to  be  found  in  company  with  any  per- 
son in  any  things  be  it  sacramental  -.  rvice  or 
other  act  of  worship,  when  the  God  of  my  sal- 
vation deigns  to  be  of  the  party.  No  power  on 
earth  shall  hinder  me  from  saying,  '^  1  will  go 
with  you,"  to  any  to  whom  I  can  add,  "  for  God 
is  with  you."  On  this  ground  I  will  venture  my 
peace,  my  soul,  my  eternal  blessedness!  And 
let  those  who  refuse  to  walk  in  "  church-com- 
munion" with  such  as  "walk  with  God,"  look 
well  after  the  account  which  they  shall  be  able 
to  render. 


317 

II.  The  second  objection  supposes  that  *Hhe 
doctrine  of  church-communion,  upon  the  princi- 
ple of  the  common  salvation,  with  all  who  call 
upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  compels  us  to 
admit  every  one  who  passes  himself  for  a  Chris- 
tian ;  and  thus,  by  abolishing  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  precious  and  the  vile,  prostrates  the 
scriptural  discipline,  and  lays  open  the  house  of 
God  to  utter  profanation." 

It  will  be  well  for  those  who  make  this  objec- 
tion, if  they  shall  be  found  to  distinguish,  in 
their  om;71  communion,  between  the  "precious 
and  the  vile,"  with  that  anxiety  which  their  ar- 
gument professes. 

But  to  the  argument  itself.  A  general  pro- 
fession of  Christianity,  as  is  shewn  by  every  day's 
experience,  may  be,  and  often  is,  compatible 
wdth  the  want  of  every  Christian  influence,  and 
even  with  hostility  to  almost  every  Christian  doc- 
trine. To  let  it  serve  as  an  apology  for  errour 
and  vice  ;  and,  under  its  broad  protection,  to  ad- 
mit to  communion  men  who  evince  neither  re- 
pentance toward  God,  nor  faith  toward  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  would  be,  indeed,  to  confound  the 
holy  with  the  profane ;  to  turn  the  temple  of  God 
into  a  den  of  thieves ;  and  to  destroy  the  very 
end  and  essence  of  sacramental  fellowship.  The 
objectors  themselves  cannot  have  a  more  firm  and 


318 

founded  abhorrence  of  suCh  infidel  charity,  such 
latitude  of  ruin,  than  has  the  writer  of  these  re- 
marks. But  they  should  remember  that  if  their 
objection  is  conclusive  against  him,  it  is  equally 
conclusive  against  the  confession  of  their  faith, 
and  the  word  of  their  God.  For  the  language 
of  both  extends  the  privilege  of  whatever  com- 
munion the  church  enjoys  to  all  them  who  call 
upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Such  a  con- 
sequence they  will  assuredly  disown  and  dis- 
prove. And  when  they  shall  have  vindicated 
their  confession  and  their  Bible  from  the  charge 
of  so  great  an  absurdity,  they  will  have  refuted 
their  own  objection. 

But  to  reply  more  directly,  I  add, 

1.  That  the  objection  is  altogether  inapplica- 
ble to  the  communion  here  defended.  For  it  is, 
expressly,  communion  with  those  who  are  ac^ 
knoioledged  to  be  Christians  by  the  objectors 
themselves.  And  surely  communion  with  such 
as  give  evidence  of  their  having  "  received  Christ 
Jesus  the  Lord,  and  of  their  walking  in  him," 
contains  neither  principle  nor  precedent  for  the 
admission  of  such  as  do  not  give  proof  of  either. 
To  welcome  friends  and  brethren  is  not  to  en- 
courage aliens  and  enemies. 

2.  "  Calling  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Je- 
i?us,"  is  not  a  loose  nor  equivocal  phrase.   It  is  a 


319 

comprehensive,  yet  precise  and  well-defined, 
character  of  a  real  and  orderly  Christian.  Its 
terms  must  be  interpreted  by  those  fuller  declara- 
tions of  the  scripture  to  which  it  refers,  and  of 
which  it  is  a  summary. 

Thus,  the  "  name"  of  Jesus  includes  whatever 
is  peculiar  to  him  as  the  Saviour  of  sinners :  ex, 
gr.  the  doctrine  of  his  person ;  of  his  righteous- 
ness;  of^  his  sacrifice ;  of  his  intercession ;  of  his 
authority — briefly,  of  his  fulness,  as  the  fountain 
of  all  that  grace  which  his  redeemed  receive  now, 
and  of  all  that  glory  which  they  shall  enjoy  here- 
after. Therefore  in  the  scriptural,  which  is  the 
only  true  sense,  no  man  can  name  his  blessed 
name  without  cherishing  the  faith  of  those  cardi- 
nal truths  which  relate  to  his  character  and 
work. 

"  Calling^^^  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  is 
equivalent  to  such  a  profession  of  faith  in  him  as 
contains  the  embracing  him  in  his  saving  offices 
— bearing  testimony  to  his  cause  and  cross — 
waiting  upon  him  in  his  ordinances — addressing 
him  in  acts  of  direct  worship — submitting  to  his 
authority — and  keeping  his  commandments.  Let 
every  one^  says  Paul,  who  names  the  name  of  Christ 
depart  from  iniquity.  This  is  our  great  practical 
test.  They  who  are  without  the  doctrine  of  Christ, 
must  not,  indeed,  presume  to  talk  of  their  virtues : 

41 


320 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  they  who  do  not  glorify 
him  as  "  made  of  God  unto  them  sanctijication^ 
crucifying  the  flesh  with  its  affections  and  lusts," 
and  studying  to  be  "  holy  in  all  manner  of  conver- 
sation," can  derive  no  true  comfort  from  their  doc- 
trinal accuracy  ;  nor  be  allowed  to  plead  it  as  a  va- 
lid title  to  sacramental  fellowship.  "  Faith  with- 
out works  is  dead^^''  in  the  judgment  of  both  God 
and  man. 

If,  therefore,  a  professed  Christian  shall  reject 
truths,  or  vent  errours,  affecting  the  substance  of 
the  gospel;  or  shall  dishonour  it  by  a  wicked  life, 
he  is  a  subject  of  the  punitive  discipline  of  the 
church ;  and,  by  the  law  of  Christ,  is  to  be  shut 
out  from  the  communion  of  the  faithful  till  he 
acquire  a  sounder  mind,  and  be  recovered  from 
the  snare  of  the  devil. 

About  these  things  there  can  be  little  difference 
of  opinion.  All  the  churches  concerned  in  the 
present  disquisition  have,  evidently,  when  they 
explain  themselves,  the  same  view  of  what  is 
meant  by  "  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus."  So  that  by  extending  our  communion 
to  such  as  answer  this  description,  wherever  they 
are  found,  we  incur  no  danger  of  throwing  open 
the  sanctuary  of  God  to  every  or  to  any  intruder. 
It  is  very  possible  that  a  grievous  backslider 
from  both  truth  and  duty  may  yet  retain  that 


321 

*^  seed  of  God^'  which  abideth  forever ;  and  be, 
at  the  very  time  of  his  scandal,  a  behever  in 
heart;  and  one  who  shall,  eventually,  "see  the 
Lord."  Such  \m as  Noah;  such  was  Lot;  such 
was  David ;  such  was  Peter,  If  it  is  the  same 
with  others,  so  much  the  better  for  themselves. 
But  the  church  having  no  power  to  "  search  the 
heart  and  try  the  reins  of  the  children  of  men," 
can  look  only  "  on  the  outward  appearance,'' 
Whatever  an  applicant  for  her  communion  may 
be  in  the  sight  of  God,  he  is  not,  he  cannot  be, 
a  Christian  in  her  sight,  unless  he  visibly  maintain 
the  faith,  and  keep  the  commandments,  of  Jesus 
Christ.  She  has  nothing  to  do  with  his  secret 
state.  In  this  matter  she  is  to  believe  only  what 
she  can  see;  or  rather  is  to  give  credit  for  what 
she  cannot  see,  only  on  account  of  what  she  can. 
Christianity  of  the  heart,  unattested  by  Christi- 
anity of  the  mouth  in  "  a  good  confession,"  and 
of  the  hfe,  in  "  fruit  unto  holiness,"  is,  to  her,  no 
Christianity  at  all. 

The  second  objection,  then,  viz.  that  our  hold- 
ing communion  with  Christians  as  such;  that  is, 
purely  on  account  of  their  being  Christians,  cuts 
down  the  hedge  of  discipline,  and  exposes  the 
house  of  God  to  defilement,  is  without  founda- 
tion, 

III,  It  is  supposed,  and  asserted  that  "by  hold- 


•  322 

ing  communion  with  members  of  churches  in 
which  there  exist  corruptions  or  abuses,  we  do 
virtually  apprpve  such  abuses  or  corruptions ;  and 
do  thereby  make  ourselves  partakers  of  other 
men's  sins." 

Where  is  the  church  which  has  no  coiTuptions, 
no  abuses  ?  nothing  to  correct  ?  Let  us  speak  out, 
and  say  that  we  ought  never  to  communicate  but 
wiiii  the  members  of  r perfect  church!  For  every 
thing  which  falls  short  of  perfection  is  an  abuse, 
is  a  corruption.  And,  as  the  rule  works  both 
ways,  other  churches  should  not,  by  our  own  ar- 
gument, tolerate  communion  with  us  whose  claim 
to  perfection  is  not  quite  indisputable.  Winit  a 
spectacle  would  this  be !  What  a  spectacle  is  it 
already,  in  the  eyes  of  God,  of  angels,  and  of 
men!  A  number  of  churches  all  wearing  the 
name,  pleading  the  authority,  possessing  substan- 
tially the  faith,  pretending  to  cherish  the  spirit, 
to  imitate  the  example,  and  to  promote  the  king- 
dom, of  their  Redeemer,  refusing  to  hold  com- 
munion with  each  other  on  account  of  their  re- 
spective corruptions!!  Truth,  open  thy  closed 
lips  and  speak  out.  Say — and  let  the  world  hear 
it — Say,  that  in  the  bosom  of  the  church  of  God 
there  is  found  a  feeling  and  a  reasoning,  the  real 
tendency  of  which  is  to  shew  that  there  ought  to 
be  no  sacramental  fellowship  between  Christians 


323 

of  different  names  under  any  possible  circum- 
stances ;  and  that  the  whole  doctrine  of  his  word 
concerning  the  communion  of  his  church,  beyond 
the  limits  of  a  particular  sect,  is  a  mere  decep- 
tion— a  mockery  of  words  without  meaning  ! 

This  might  be,  and  in  itself  is,  a  sufficient  an- 
swer. But  as  the  objection  is  a  favourite  one ; 
and  calculated  to  perplex  the  tender  conscience, 
it  merits  a  more  thorough  sifting. 

It  presents  two  cases ; 

First,  members  of  other  churches  communi- 
cating with  us. 

Secondly,  our  members  communicating  with 
other  churches.  The  principle,  however,  of  both 
cases  being  the  same,  they  shall  be  considered 
together. 

The  argument,  then,  is  this; 

''  We  can  neither  admit  to  our  sacramental  ta- 
ble members  of  other  churches,  nor  ourselves 
participate  in  theirs,  because  there  are  things  in 
their  constitution  or  practice  which  we  must  ac= 
count  to  be  corruptions;  so  that  by  holding  com- 
munion with  them,  in  either  form,  we  should,  by 
implication  at  least,  approve  what  it  is  our  duty 
to  condemn ;  and  thus  bring  sin  upon  our  own 
souls." 

If  this  reasoning  is  correct;  if  the  conclusion 
fairly  follows  from  the  premises,  a  man  must  be 


■  324 

blind  not  to  see,  that,  out  of  our  own  sect,  there 
is  not  now,  and  never  has  been,  a  church  with 
which,  or  with  a  single  member  of  which,  we  can 
or  could  have  lawful  communio:?.  The  purest 
churches,  the  holiest  of  saints,  the  most  gallant 
sons  of  the  truth — reformers,  martyrs,  apostles,  are 
all  under  the  ban  of  tliis  terrible  proscription ;  all 
sink  under  one  fell  stroke  of  this  desolating  scythe ! 
For  not  a  church  can  be  named  from  the  present 
hour  back  to  the  first  age,  which  had  no  cor- 
ruptions to  condemn.  And  is  it,  indeed,  come  to 
this,  that  neither  Romaine  nor  Hervey;  neither 
Baxter  nor  Bates,  nor  Calamy,  nor  Hoice,  nor  Ow- 
en, nor  Usher,  nor  Rutherford-^not  DailU  nor 
Claude ;  not  Hooper,  nor  Ridley,  nor  Latimer,  nor 
Cranmer^— not  Luther,  nor  Calvin,  nor  Knox,  nor 
Melancthon,  nor  Ziiinglius ;  nor  Hnss,  nor  Wick- 
liffe — no,  nor  yet  Athanasius,  nor  Augustine,  nor 
Cyprian,  nor  Irenceus^  nor  Ignatius,  nor  Polycarp, 
nor  Clemens;  not  even  Timothy,  or  Titus,  or  Paul, 
or  John — not  one  on  the  whole  list  of  evangelical 
worthies,  from  the  martyr  Stephen  down  to  the 
missionary  Vander  Kemp,  could  be  permitted, 
were  he  on  earth,  to  take  a  seat  with  US,  at  the 
table  of  the  Lord  ?  For  they  were  all  in  churches 
more  or  less  corrupted ;  some  of  them  corrupted 
grievously ! 
And  what,  let  me  ask,  what,  upon  such  terms, 


325 

was  the  condition  of  God's  witnesses  for  truth 
during  their  struggle  with  Papal  Rome,  before 
they  "  came  out  of  her  ?"  Until  their  separation 
the  church  of  God  Vvas  in  her.  If  the  objection 
is  sound,  no  person  could  lawfully  communicate 
with  any  of  her  members:  that  is  to  say,  GocPs 
oivn  ivitnesses  could  not  lawfully  communicate  with 
his  own  church  ! 

I  have  not  forgotten  the  usual  distinction  be- 
tween a  reforming  and  a  declining  church :  al- 
though it  does  not  seem  strong  enough  to  bear  all 
the  weight  which  has  been  laid  upon  it.  It  is 
passed  over  here,  not  only  because  the  church 
of  Rome,  for  centuries  of  the  period  referred  to, 
was  growing  worse  and  worse  in  a  state  of  accel- 
erated apostasy,  but  also  because  the  objection 
is  equally  conclusive  against  communion  with  a 
church  in  any  state  ivhatever,  so  long  as  she  re- 
tains things  which  it  would  be  sinful  to  approve. 
Let  us,  therefore,  press  it  a  little  farther. 

1.  If  communion  with  a  church  is  to  be  inter- 
preted as  an  approbation  of  her  sins,  then,  by  the 
same  rule,  communion  with  an  individual  is  to  be 
interpreted  as  an  approbation  o^his  sins.  And  so 
the  communion  of  saints  is  cut  up  by  the  roots. 

It  avails  nothing  to  say,  that  "  as  the  sacramen- 
tal supper  is  the  act  of  a  church  in  her  social 
character,  we  do,  by  the  very  fact  of  communion 


32G 

with  her,  acknowledge  her  as  a  whole;  and  thus, 
by  implication  at  least,  put  the  seal  of  our  ap- 
probation to  whatever  belongs  to  her  as  a  clmrchP 

The  difficulty  is  precisely  where  it  was.  I 
must  also  take  an  individual  as  a  whole.  His 
communicating  is  an  act  of  the  whole  man. 
If  I  cannot,  for  the  purposes  of  communion,  se- 
parate the  divine  ordinances  in  a  church  from 
her  corruptions,  how  can  I  thus  separate  the 
graces  of  a  Christian  from  his  sins?  If  by  com- 
munion with  her  in  God's  ordinances,  I  must 
participate  in  her  corruptions  also,  how  can  I 
commune  with  a  believer  in  his  faith  and  love, 
and  not  participate  in  the  "  sin  that  dwelleth  in 
him  ?"  Let  your  objection  set  out  from  any  point, 
on  any  course,  it  cuts  up,  in  its  progress,  all  com- 
munion of  saints  by  the  very  roots. 

2.  If  communicating,  as  a  guest,  with  another 
church,  involves  an  approbation  of  her  sins,  by 
the  same  rule  communicating  with  my  own 
church  involves  an  approbation  of  hers,  and  ren- 
ders me  by  so  much  the  more  inexcusable,  by 
how  much  a  transient  act  of  intercourse  with  a 
church  in  her  corruptions  whether  great  or  small, 
is  less  culpable  than  that  regidar  and  habitual 
intimacy  with  her  which  is  unavoidable  by  her 
members.  And  so  we  come  again  to  the  old  re- 
sult ;  viz.  that  there  can  be  no  lawful  church-com- 


327 

munion  upon  earth :  with  this  addition,  that  the 
most  exceptionable  and  criminal  form  in  which 
it  can  possibly  exist,  is  communion  with  one's 
own  church  while  a  corruption  or  abuse  can  he  found 
in  her  skirts. 

In  order  to  evade  this  conclusion,  good  and  sen- 
sible men  have  resorted  to  a  distinction  of  which 
the  soundness  is  more  than  doubtful. 

They  say,  that "  what  may  be  wrong  in  our  own 
"  church  is  always  supposed  to  be  under  our  own 
"  government.  As  members  of  our  own  church, 
"  we  must  always  have  some  degree  of  influence 
"  over  our  own  government:  and  as  it  is  our  duty 
"  to  exercise  tnis  influence,  w^hateveritmay  be,  at 
"  all  times  and  to  its  utmost  extent ;  we  may  at  all 
"  times  indulge  the  hope  of  having  that  w  rong  or 
"  those  wrongs  rectified.  But  with  respect  to  the 
"  errours,  or  defects,  or  corruptions,  of  other 
''  churches,  till  we  become  actual  members,  we 
"  can  indulge  no  such  hopes." 

This  reply,  instead  of  destroying  the  conclusion 
against  which  it  is  levelled,  does,  in  fact,  surren- 
der the  objection  it  was  brought  forward  to  de- 
fend. That  objection  was  and  is,  that  by  the 
act  of  communion  with  an  erroneous  or  corrupt- 
ed church  we  patronise  her  errours  or  corruptions, 
i.  e.  we  contract  pollution  from  contact  with  a 
polluted  society.   But  the  contact  cannot  be  the 

42 


328 

less  close,  uor  the  pollution  less  contagious  from 
the  circumstance  of  the  society  being  our  own. 
Thence  it  follows  that  communion  here,  on  ac- 
count of  its  intimacy  and  extent,  is  worse  than 
any  where  else,  while  there  is  any  wrong  to  be 
rectified  among  ourselves.  No,  says  the  reply; 
"  We  have  influence,  we  have  control  over  our 
own  defects" — therefore — w^hat?  Why  truly,  "we 
are  not  involved  in  the  sin  of  our  own  church  by 
our  communion  with  her."  No  other  inference 
can  repel  the  conclusion  to  which  the  objection 
was  driven.  But  the  whole  ground  is  changed: 
and  it  is  now  asserted  that  our  contamination  does 
not  proceed  from  communion  with  a  corrupted 
church ;  but  from  our  inability  to  purify  her  !  Here 
then,  I  repeat,  is  an  absolute  surrender  of  the 
objection  which  was  to  have  been  defended. 
And  the  reply  contains  this  curious  doctrine,  that 
vices  which  we  cannot  cure  spread  their  leprosy 
over  us  by  contact ;  but  vices  we  can  cure,  do 
not.  And  that  the  shortest  w  ay  of  escaping  the 
charge  of  being  partakers  in  other  men's  sins,  is 
to  go  over  to  their  church :  and  then,  as  members^ 
we  shall  have  influence  in  reforming  her ! 

But  can  we  seriously  persuade  ourselves  by 
such  a  reason,  that  we  may  safely  communicate 
at  home  though  not  abroad  ?  Shall  a  man  keep 
at  a  prudent  distance  from  the  fire  on  his  neigh= 


329 

bour's  hearth  because  he  has  no  rightful  control 
over  it  ;  and  thrust  his  naked  foot  fearlessly  into 
the  fire  on  his  own,  because  he  has  a  well  at  his 
door  and  may  extinguish  it  when  he  pleases  ?  Shall 
he  avoid  the  dirt  of  his  neighbour's  premises  and 
wade  through  the  mire  of  his  own,  because  he 
can  cleanse  the  one  and  not  the  other  ?  Will 
his  fire  or  his  filth  be  so  charmed  by  his  meta- 
phy sicks  or  his  rights,  as  that  the  one  shall  not 
burn  nor  the  other  defile  him?  And  shall  the 
mere  capacity  of  injluencing  the  reformation  of  a 
church,  so  neutralize  the  poison  of  her  sins  as 
that  it  shall  be  harmless  to  her  members^  while  it 
continues  deleterious  and  may  be  mortal  to  her 
guests  ?  Let  us  not  deceive  our  souls  with  vain 
words.  There  is  ground  to  fear  that  notions  such 
as  have  now^  been  combatted,  quiet  the  con- 
sciences of  many  who  might  else  be  roused;  and 
compose  them  securely  to  sleep  under  abuses 
which  would  startle  them  in  others.  Thev  are 
pleased  with  dreaming  of  a  power  which  tney 
never  exercise.  They  can  rectify  the  faults  of 
their  own  church  but  do  not  And  thus  year  slips 
away  after  year ;  and  life  after  life :  reformation 
is  loudly  called  for,  and  the  delay  of  it  severely 

chided,  every  where  but at  home  !  A  church 

which  needs  no  reform  is  yet  a  desideratum  :  and 
a  church  fairly  and  honestly  setting  about  the 


.   330 

work  of  her  onm  reformation,  is  a  glory  not  of 
this  hemisphere.  In  truth,  human  passions  are 
so  unmanageable  in  nothing,  as  in  what  relates 
to  human  sins.  Let  any  man  make  the  ex- 
periment, and  he  shall  find  that  to  touch  abuses 
which  have  become  incorporated  with  the  habits 
of  society,  is  to  kindle  a  flame  of  the  most  fierce 
and  inextinguishable  resentments.  It  is,  there- 
fore, perfectly  wild  to  place  the  lawfulness  of  com- 
munion with  our  own  church,  and  the  unlavvful- 
ness  of  it  with  another,  upon  the  footing  of  our 
having  some  injiuence  over  the  former  and  none 
over  the  latter. 

It  must  be  some  strange  mistake,  some  potent 
illusion,  which  can  have  persuaded  worthy  and 
sensible  men  to  adopt  such  an  objection  to  Catho- 
lick  communion ;  and  a  more  than  common  distress 
ija  maintaining  it,  which  could  reduce  them  to  so 
feeble  a  defence,  as  have  now  been  exposed. 
What  is  it?     Shortly  and  simply  this — 

Taking  it  for  granted,  that  communion  with  a 
CHURCH  or  ivith  her  members,  implies  our  approba- 
tion of  her  in  all  things  belonging  to  her  actual 
CONDITION  as  an  organized  body. 

We  have  seen  above,  that,  on  such  a  principle, 
society  cannot  exist.  But,  happily,  the  whole 
world  being  judge,  the  principle  assumed  is  false. 
For  it  might  be  shewn  to  contradict  the  practical 


331 

understanding  of  men  in  all  the  modifications  of 
their  intercourse. 

The  true  and  only  safe  rule  of  interpreting  so- 
cial communion  is,  that  it  always  goes  so  far  as 
the  acts  which  express  it;  but  is  not,  necessarily^ 
to  be  considered  as  extending  further. 

This  rule  is  of  inspired  authority.  If  any  of 
them  that  believe  not,  says  Paul,  bid  you  to  afeasty 
and  ye  be  disposed  to  go :  whatsoever  is  set  before 
you,  eat,  asking  no  question  for  conscience  sake. 
But  if  any  man  say  unto  you,  "  This  is  offered  in 
sacrifice  unto  idols,"  eat  not,^ 

The  apostle  here  resolves  a  case  of  conscience : 
viz.  A  Pagan  invites  his  Christian  neighbour  to 
an  entertainment.  May  he  lawfully  accept  the  in- 
vitation  ? 

The  inviter  sustains  a  threefold  character — -as 
a  host — as  an  infidel — and  as  an  idolater.  Thus 
situated,  he  asks  his  Christian  friend  to  eat  with 
him  ?  "  What  shall  I  do  ?"  "  Go,"  says  the 
apostle,  "  if  you  be  so  inclined."  "  But  how 
shall  I  conduct  myself  with  regard  to  my  food: 
as,  in  all  probability,  some  of  the  dishes  wdll  be 
made  up  of  flesh  that  has  been  sacrificed  to 
idols  ?"  "  Raise  no  scruples,"  rejoins  the  apos- 
tle. "  You  were  invited  to  dine — you  go  to  dine. 
Your  communion  with  your  host  is  neither  in  his 

*  J.  Cer.  X.  27. 


■  332 

infidelity  nor  his  idolatry^  but  simply  in  his  din- 
ner,^^  "  What !  if  part  of  that  dinner  has  been 
offered  to  idols?"  "  That  is  no  concern  of  yours. 
The  creature  is  in  itself  good;  it  is  God's  crea- 
ture :  it  was  granted  to  you  for  food — its  blood 
having  been  shed  before  an  idol's  altar  injures 
the  flesh  no  more  than  if  it  had  been  shed  in  the 
slaughter-house.  You  have  nothing  to  do  with  it 
but  as  meat.  Receive  it  with  thankfulness,  and  ask 
no  questions."  "  But  if  my  host  should  tell  me, 
^  this  meat  is  a  sacrifice  to  his  idol-god  ?'  "  "  The 
case  is  entirely  altered.  There  is  a  new  condition 
introduced.  You  are  now  invited  to  fellowship 
not  only  in  meat,  but  in  idolatry  also.  Your  course 
is  plain.  Eat  not — not  a  mouthful:  or  you  are  a 
partaker  in  your  neighbour's  sin." 

The  doctrine  of  the  apostle  relieves  us  at  once 
from  the  difficulty  started  by  the  objection  under 
review,  and  furnishes  us  with  a  sure  and  easy  rule 
of  conscience  in  regard  to  church-fellowship,  viz. 
No  particular  act  of  communion  is  to  be  interpreted 
as  reaching  beyond  itself,  unless  it  be  coupled 
with  other  acts  by  an  express  or  known  condition. 

If,  therefore,  1  sit  down  at  the  table  of  the  Lord 
in  another  church,  or  receive  one  of  her  mem- 
bers to  that  holy  table  in  my  own,  neither  my 
act  nor  his  can  fairly  be  construed  as  more  than 
an  act  of  communion  in  "  the  body  and  blood  of 


333 

the  Lord."  Neither  of  us  has,  by  vhlue  of  that 
act,  any  thing  to  do  with  the  defects  of  our  re- 
spective churches  in  other  matters.  "There  are 
errours  in  doctrine" — you  cry—-"  there  i^re  cor- 
ruptions in  worship — there  is  unscriptural  govern- 
ment— there  is  neglect  of  discipHne!" 

Be  it  so.  Are  these  declensions  such  as  consist 
with  "  holding  the  head  ?"  If  not,  I  have  fallen  in 
with  a  "  synagogue  of  Satan."  And  the  question 
has  no  reference  to  communion  with  Satan  or 
his  synagogues.  If  thiey  are  ;  then  is  a  seat  at  the 
Lord's  table  declared  or  understood  to  be  a  sign 
of  my  approving  them?  If  it  is,  Paul  has  decided 
for  me.  The  table  to  me  is  not  the  table  of  the 
Lord.  But  if  there  is  no  such  condition,  the 
sins  of  my  fellow- worshippers  aretheir  own  :  and 
shall  not  stand  in  the  way  of  my  testimony  to 
Christ  my  passover  cnicijied  for  me, 

"  But  if  by  communicating  wdth  a  church  you 
do  not  acknowledge  all  that  belongs  to  her,  what 
do  you  acknowledge?"  Much,  very  much.  I 
acknowledge  her  to  be  a  church,  a  true  church 
of  Jesus  Christ — I  acknowledge  her  sacramental 
table  for  his  ow^n  ordinance;  where  it  is  my  duty 
to  shew  forth  his  death,  and  my  privilege  to 
look  for  a  blessed  experience  of  its  benefits — 
This,  all  this,  I  acknowledge:  acknowledge  cheer- 
fully ;  and  can  do  it  without  following  her  direct- 


334 

If  or  indirectly  in  those  things  in  which  she  does 
not  follow  Christ. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  the  sacraments  being 
party-ordinances  among  ChuQimns ;  i.  e.  ordinances 
in  which  we  bind  ourselves  to  a.  sect;  they  are 
precisely  those  which  are  divested  of  every  sec- 
tarian quality  and  mark — those  whose  place  is 
emphatically  in  the  church- catholick  as  such  ;  and 
which  it  is  impossible,  without  profane  violence, 
to  carry  over  the  threshold  of  any  sectarian  tem- 
ple whatever.  Yes,  the  holy  table  is  the  badge 
of  no  party  but  the  party  of  the  Son  of  God.  It 
is  here  that  they  who  "  know  his  name  and  put 
their  trust  in  him,"  may  and  should  unite  their 
homage  to  his  cross  and  their  fealty  to  his  service, 
upon  the  broad  and  glorious  ground  of  his  having 
"  loved  them  and  washed  them  from  their  sins  in 
his  own  blood."  This  is  the  place  where  Chris- 
tians  are  not  to  put  on^  but  to  put  off^  the  secta- 
rian, and  to  say  each  to  his  brother,  "  Beloved y 
let  us  LOVE  one  another ;  for  love  is  of  God." 

Long  as  this  article  is,  it  cannot  be  finished 
without  removing  another  difficulty.  "  If  we  are 
thus  to  hold  communion  with  visible  Christians 
and  Christian  churches,  how  shall  we  obey  the 
scriptures  ?"  What  scriptures  ?  "  All  those  which 
require  us  to  keep  ourselves  pure — To  have  no  fel- 
lowship yyith  unfruitful  works  of  darkness — to  come 


'^.Qr, 


out  and  be  separate — especially,  to  unthdraiv  from 
every  brother  that  ivalketh  disorderly,'^''  The  an- 
swer is  short.  All  such  scriptures  are  misapplied. 
Commandments  to  separate  from  idolatry — from 
the  'World  which  lieth  in  wickedness — from  the 
mother  of  harlots  and  abominations  of  the  earth — 
from  fellowship  with  men  of  any  sortm  their  sins ^ 
are  indeed  abundant,  plain,  and  peremptory. 
But  a  commandment  for  one  believer  whose  con- 
versation is  as  becometh  the  gospel,  to  refuse 
communion  with  another — for  one  church  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  to  refuse  communion  with  another — 
such  a  commandment  is  not  in  the  Bible,  nor  any 
thing  like  it.  The  commandments  of  Christ,  as 
has  been  proved  above,  are  all  of  a  contrary  com- 
plexion. He  does  not  enjoi^i,  he  forbids  subh  a 
refusal. 

The  passage  from  2  Thess.  iii.  6,  Noiv  ive  com- 
mand you,  brethren,  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Je- 
sus Christ,  thatyeivithdraiv  yourselves  fro7n  every 
brother  that  ivalketh  disorderly  and  not  after  the 
tradition  which  ye  received  of  lis,  has  met  with  pe- 
culiar hardships.  Modern  separatists  plead  it  as 
a  direct  warrant  for  their  separation ;  and  they 
may  all  plead  it  with  equal  propriety.  In  the  pri- 
mitive church,  however,  it  was  quoted  the  other 
way — against  the  separatists  ;  and  quoted  as  being 
decisive  for  their  condemnation.    Not  they  who 

43 


336 

held,  but  they  who  declined  to  hold  communion 
with  other  Christians  and  churches,  were  brand- 
ed as  the  *'  disorderly  brethren."^  Both  interpre- 
tations cannot  be  right,  although  both  may  be 
wrong.  And  it  would  be  somewhat  amusing, 
yet  a  little  melancholy,  if  the  text,  instead  of  be- 
ing on  both  sides,  should  after  all  be  on  neither. 
Let  us  see. 

The  word  rendered  "  disorderly,"  and  its  rela- 
tives, occur  but  four  times  in  the  New  Testamentj 
and  three  of  them  are  in  this  chapter.  They  de- 
scribe the  character  and  conduct  of  certain  pro- 
fessors who  availed  themselves  of  the  church's 
bounty  to  live  in  idleness,  and  employed  their  lei- 
sure in  disturbing  their  neighbours.  Thus  Paul 
has  explained  his  own  meaning,  v.  11.  For  ive 
hear,  says  he,  that  there  are  some  which  walk  dis- 
orderly among  yon ;  working  not  at  all,  but 
are  busy-bodies.  This  he  resented  as  a  reproach 
to  the  Christian  calling;  adding,  v.  12.  ''Now 
them  that  are  such,  we  command  and  exhort  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ivith  quietness  they  work, 
andeatTURx^  own  bread."  And  by  way  of  stimu- 
lating them  to  honest  industry,  he  reminds  the 
Thessalonians  of  an  order  he  had  passed  when 
he  was  with  them,  viz.  that  no  lazy  professor  of 

*  Cypkian.  De  unit,  eccks.  p.  119. 


337 

religion  should  receive  any  support  from  the  pub- 
lick  charity:  which  is  the  import  of  the  "com- 
mand," that  ifanij  would  not  work,  neither  should 
he  EAT. 

From  such  "disorderly"  persons  the  Thessalo- 
nians  were  charged  to  "  withdraw ;"  and  the  duty 
of  Christians  in  similar  cases,  is  still  the  same. 
But  how? 

The  charge  was  addressed  to  theThessalonians 
either  in  their  publick  or  their  private  character — 
either  as  a  church,  or  as  individuals.  If  the  for- 
mer, it  is  a  charge  to  have  no  church-communion 
with  the  offender — if  the  latter,  to  discountenance 
him  by  avoiding  personal  intimacy. 

That  it  is  not  the  former;  i.  e.  not  a  charge  to 
withhold  church  communion  seems  clear,  for  the 
following  reasons. 

.  1st.  The  terms  are  entirely  different  from  those 
which  the  scripture  elsewhere  uses  in  regard  to 
church-fellowship. 

2d.  A  church,  in  her  collective  capacity,  does 
not  withdraw  herself  ixom.  communion  with  an  of- 
fender; she  authoritatively /?i«^5  him  aivay  from 
her  communion.  1  Cor.  v.  13. 

3d.  The  "  withdrawing,"  here  enjoined,  was  to 
be  a  means  of  bringing  the  disorderly  brother  to 
a  sense  of  his  misbehaviour,  and  a  compliance 
with  the  apostle's  mandate  for  abandoning  his 


■  33^ 

idle  and  impertinent  habits:  in  case  of  disobedi- 
ence, he  was  to  be  reported  to  the  apostle  for  ulterior 
judgment:  and,  in  the  meantime  his  brethren  were 
to  '•'have  no  company  with  him."  v.  14.  There- 
fore he  was  still  in  communion. 

4th.  Even  after  this  "withdrawing" — this  "re- 
porting"— this  "having  no  company  with  him," 
he  was  "not  to  be  accounted  as  an  enemy,  but 
to  be  admonished  as  a  brother." 

The  alternative  is,  that  Paul  speaks  of  private 
and  familiar  intercourse.  His  terms  apply  to  this 
exactly — The  word  rendered,  "have  company/' 
is  found  but  twice  more  in  the  new  New  Testa- 
ment, it  is  both  times  in  his  own  writings,  and 
both  times  in  that  sense.  He  is,  then,  directing 
the  Thessalonian  Christians  how  to  vindicate  the 
worthy  name  whereby  they  were  called,  in  their 
private  carriage  toward  the  "  disorderly  brother;" 
with  a  view  to  prevent  the  necessity  of  more  co- 
ercive measures.  They  were  to  shew  their  dis- 
approbation and  grief  by  a  reserve  and  distance, 
marking  a  strong  contrast  with  the  usual  open, 
frank,  and  affectionate  character  of  Christian  so- 
ciety. This  was  a  gentle,  and  delicate,  but  plain 
and  pungent  reproof;  calculated  to  sting  a  man 
of  any  ingenuous  feeling  to  the  very  heart. 

They  were  to  press  upon  him  the  apostolick 
injunciion;  and  to  observe  whether  or  not,  wherx 


^39 

seconded  by  their  own  example  and  carriage,  it 
was  likely  to  produce  any  good  effect. 

If  he  resisted  these  milder  proceedings,  they 
were  to  decline  his  company  altogether;  but  to 
leave  with  his  conscience  a  friendly  and  faithful 
admonition  of  his  sin,  of  his  disgrace,  and  of  his 
peril — that,  if  possible,  he  might  be  brought  to 
an  honest  shame,  and  a  complete  reformation. 

See  how  careful  and  cautious  the  great  apos- 
tle was  in  every  thing  affecting  either  the  glory 
of  his  master,  or  the  feelings  and  privileges  of 
his  fellow  Christians.  He  knew,  on  the  one  hand, 
no  compromise  with  sin ;  but,  on  the  other,  he 
knew  nothing  of  that  summary  process  of  sus- 
pension and  excommunication  by  which  it  has 
been  fashionable  in  some  churches  both  to  in- 
dulge the  lust  of  the  lash,  and  to  get  rid  of  fur- 
ther trouble  with  offending  members. 

See  also,  how  he  has  taught  Christians  in  their 
private  capacity  to  maintain  the  dignity  of  their 
profession — to  be  ministers  of  purity  to  each 
other — and  to  aid  in  supporting  the  order  of  the 
house  of  God. 

But  how  does  all  this  enjoin  or  justify  our  re- 
fusing the  fellowship  of  Christians  whom  we  own 
as  "  brethren  in  the  Lord  ;"  aiad  of  churches 
which  we  own  as  having  his  truth  ?  The  scripture 
has  said  "  Withdraw  from  thrifdess,  meddling, 


340 

mischief-making  religionists;"  therefore^  my  ''be-- 
loved  brother" — therefore^  respected  churches  of 
Jesus  Christ  J  whosoever  and  whatsoever  ye  be 
that  go  not  under  my  sectarian  name — I  can 
have  no  communion  with  you! !  Who  that  pre- 
tends to  reason,  will  so  gamble  with  his  own  un- 
derstanding— who  that  pretends  to  love,  can  so 
slander  kis  own  heart,  as  to  adopt  such  a  mon- 
strous ''  therefore  ?^^ 

But  we  have  not  yet  done.  The  objection  dies 
hard.  It  has  been,  it  is,  and  \^1  be  insisted  on, 
that  the  principle  of  Paul's  decision  is  general ; 
and  that  there  is  as  good  reason  for  *'  withdraw- 
ing" from  a  churchy  as  from  "  a  brother  that  walk- 
eth  disorderly."  Agreed.  But  you  are  no  nearer^ 
your  point  than  before.  Because  we  are  not  to 
have  intercourse  with  a  church  that  "  walks  dis- 
orderly," does  it  follow  that  we  are  to  hold  no 
communion  with  any  church  or  church-members, 
but  our  oivn  ?  with  any  that  have  defects  and 
blemishes  ?  This  inference  is  as  monstrous  as  the 
other.  It  is  very  certain  that  Paul  did  not  thus 
understand  himself:  For  both  his  doctrine  and 
practice,  as  every  page  of  his  history  shews. 
w  ere  of  a  different  sort.  Did  he  say  to  the  Chris- 
tians of  his  tim,e,  "  the  churches  of  Corinth,  of 
Rome,  of  Galatia  are  '  disorderly  ;'  and  you  must 
have  no  communion  with  them  or  with  their 


341 

members?"  No  such  thing.  Yet  we,  directly 
in  the  face  of  apostoHck  principle  and  precedent, 
ive  seize  upon  an  ungracious  term  ;  we  apply  it 
without  ceremony  to  the  churches  around;  and 
then  shelter  our  sects  and  our  schisms  under  the 
authority  of  the  scripture!  We  do  in  effect  say, 
that  the  Lord  Jesus  has  commanded  his  people 
to  break  up  his  church  into  shreds  and  fragments ; 
and  to  have  no  communion  with  each  other;  up- 
on the  pretext,  alike  convenient  for  them  all,  that 
they  "walk  disorderly!" 

But  have  we  well  considered  what  we  are  do- 
ing when  we  brand  a  Christian  or  a  Christian 
church  as  disorderly?  Have  we  weighed  the  sense, 
have  we  measured  the  opprobrium,  of  that  epi- 
thet? Have  we  remembered  that  as  used  by  the 
apostle  it  marks  a  character  utterly  inconsistent 
with  the  power  of  true  religion  ?  a  character  which 
dishonours  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  ?  And  are 
we  prepared  to  judge  thus  of  all  the  Christians 
and  churches  whose  communion  we  shun  ? 

Unveil  thy  face,  O  Truth,  lift  up  thy  voice, 
and  shake  thy  hand !  Not  the  law  of  God — not 
scriptural  interpretation — not  the  spirit  of  bro 
therly-kindness — but  Ignorance,  but  Jealousy, 
but  Vanity,  but  Passion,  but  Pride,  occupy  the 
seat  of  Judgment,   and  fulminate  the   charge, 

Disorderly ^''^  against  individuals  and  churches 


if 


342 

in  whom  the  "  Refiner's  fire"  may  find  less  dross 
to  "  purge  away"  than  in  their  self-pleased  ac- 
cusers. Here  is  the  mischief.  Every  one  accounts 
that  to  be  order  which  he  has  himself  been  ac- 
customed to  practise:  and  whoever  does  not 
move  precisely  in  his  track,  "  walks  disorderly." 

The  question  concerning  a  church,  in  order  to 
communion,  ought  to  be,  "  What  is  her  suhstan- 
tial  character  ?  Has  she  the  truth,  the  ordinances, 
the  Spirit,  of  Christ  ?  Does  she  own  "  the  Head," 
and  the  Head  own  her?  Then  whatever  be  her 
failings,  I  too  will  own  her.  I  shall  condemn 
them,  lament  them,  pray  over  them,  and  bear 
with  them.  I  will  not  quarrel  with  her  about 
forms,  about  ceremonies,  about  any  of  those 
points  in  which  our  disagreement  does  not  pre- 
vent us  from  being  one  in  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  For  the  sake  of  that  transcendant  com- 
mon interest  I  will  walk  with  her  in  love  and  fel- 
lowship." And  thus  it  was  once.  But  all  is  re- 
versed now. 

The  question  is  no  longer  about  suhstmice^  but 
about  accide^it — not  about  those  vital  principles 
and  virtues  which  constitute  the  solid  glory  of  a 
church,  and  are  the  seal  of  God's  own  Spirit ; 
but  about  imperfections  which  yet  do  neither 
destroy  their  being,  nor  hinder  their  predomi- 
nance: and  especially  about  those  things  in  which 


343 

$he  differs  from  our  own  peculiarities^.  Here  is  the 
huge  stumbling-block — the  inexpiable  trans- 
gression. One  of  our  churches  breaks  her  sacra- 
mental bread  in  company  with  a  sister-church, 
where  the  "  Spirit  of  grace"  sheds  down  his 
holiest  influence — where  the  gospel  "  has  a  free 
course  and  is  glorified" — where  the  "  image  of 
the  First-born,"  throws  its  radiance  around; 
and  "  love  of  the  brethren"  flows  from  heart  to 
heart  till  the  swelling  tide  burst  forth  in  streams 
of  hallowed  transport;  and  the  scene  compels 
that  reverential  testimony,  "  How  venerable  is 
this  place!  Surely  this  is  none  other  than  the 
house  of  God  !  and  this  is  the  gate  of  Heaven !" 
"But  with  whom  has  she  taken  this  'sweet 
counsel.'  Do  they  follow  us  ?"  "  Alas,  no  !  they 
only  follow  Christ!"  The  charm  is  dissolved — 
They  are  a  "  disorderly"  church :  Their  commu- 
nion is  foul !  O  my  soul,  how  shall  these  things 
appear  when  GOD  arises  to  judgment  ? 

IV.  It  is  contended,  that  free  communion  "by 
giving  publick  countenance  to  churches  erro- 
neous or  corrupt,  destroys  the  force,  or  at  least 
shackles  the  freedom  of  a  faithful  testimony  for 
Christ  and  his  truth." 

If  that  publick  countenance  which  is  given  to 
a  church  by  communion  with  her,  were  of  course 
a  publick  countenance  to  her  errours  or  corrup- 

44 


S44 

tions,  the  objection  would  be  unanswemble.  For 
it  would  be  with  the  worst  imaginable  grace  that 
a  man  could  remonstrate  against  sins  which  he 
openly  encourages  by  his  own  example.  But 
such  is  not  the  fact,  as  was  largely  proved  in  the 
preceding  article.  And  it  is  surprising  that  they 
who  make  the  objection  do  not  perceive  that, 
like  the  former,  it  strikes,  with  double  force,  at 
communion  with  our  own  church  so  long  as  an 
errour  or  corruption  adheres  to  her.  For  if  occa- 
sional and  partial  fellowship  with  a  church  is  to 
shut  the  mouth,  or  diminish  the  boldness,  of  our 
testimony  against  her  faults  ;  much  more  will  that 
be  the  effect  of  a  fellow^ship  complete  and  per- 
manent. And  so  in  its  zeal  for  pure  commu- 
nion, this  objection  would  banish  all  communion 
from  the  face  of  the  earth  ! 

But  that  the  reply  m-ay  be  more  direct  and 
ample,  let  us  strip  the  objection  of  its  form  and 
examine  its  substance- — its  principle.  This  mani- 
festly is,  that  friendship  and  intimacy  are  incom- 
patible with  proper  admonition  !  What  say  Nature 
and  Experience?  Who  may,  Avith  the  least  hazard 
of  displeasing,  take  the  greatest  liberty  of  expos- 
tulation and  rebuke  ?  One  who  treats  me  coldly, 
who  avoids  my  company,  and  spurns  an  invita- 
tion to  a  meal  in  my  house  ?  or  one  who  is  kind, 
sociable,  aflectionate  in  his  intercourse  with  me? 


345 

There  can  be  but  one  answer;  and  that  answer 
is  in  every  man's  bosom.  If  you  hope  that  1  shall 
profit  by  your  re/jroq/6-,  you  must  convince  me  of 
your  love,  1  will  listen  Avith  candour  and  sub- 
mission to  a  friend  who  avails  himself  of  his  known 
regard  for  me  to  tell  me  my  faults  frankly,  yet 
tenderly,  with  an  evident  concern  for  my  im- 
provement: while  resentment,  resistance,  and 
recrimination  will  probably  reward  the  ofFicious- 
ness  which  has  no  claim  to  such  a  freedom,  and 
delights  to  mortify  if  not  to  expose  me.  It  is  hu- 
man nature,  in  the  child  and  in  the  man — in  the 
individual  and  in  society :  and  all  human  expe- 
rience attests  it. 

Nothing,  therefore,  could  be  more  unfortunate 
than  this  objection.  The  very  contrary  is  the 
truth.  They  who  respect  a  church  ;  who  honour 
in  her  the  ordinances  of  Jesus  Christ,  get  an  ac- 
cess to  her  confidence  which  will  be  denied  to 
others.  They  acquire,  by  their  alTection,  a  right 
w^hich  she  will  concede,  to  point  out  wherein  she 
"walks  not  uprightly  according  to  the  truth  of 
the  gospel :"  and  they  are  likely,  in  this  way  if  at 
all,  to  be  instrumental  in  doing  her  good.  Ac- 
knowledge, commend,  rejoice  in,  her  excellen- 
cies ;  and  you  may  speak  to  her  Aeely,  perhaps 
effectually,  of  her  deficiencies.* 

'  This  is  after  the  example  of  Christ  himself.     Rev,  ii.  12—17. 


346 

Such  a  temper  and  treatment  would,  indeed, 
be  irreconcilable  with  the  notions,  feelings,  and 
conduct  which  are  but  too  common.  They  would 
put  out  of  countenance  those  Pharisaical,  nause- 
ating panegjricks  which  many  are  so  fond  of  la- 
vishing upon  "  OUR  church" — They  would 
smother  the  noise  of  the  brawler;  would  spoil 
the  trade  of  ecclesiastical  talebearers ;  would 
reduce  to  their  proper  insignificance  the  busy- 
bodies  whom  strife  makes  important;  would  ab- 
solutely strike  dead  those  petty  hostilities  which 
irritated  sectarians  keep  alive  for  the  pleasure, 
one  would  suppose,  of  having  something  to  fight 
about — But  they  would  create  a  pause,  a  calm, 
in  which  might  be  heard  the  voice  of  that  celes- 
tial "  wisdom  w  hich  is  first  pure,  then  peaceable, 
gentle,  and  easy  to  be  entreated,  full  of  compasr 
sion  and  of  good  fruits,  w  ithout  partiality  and 
without  hypocrisy." 

Let  us  lay  aside  disguise.  The  antipathies  and 
collisions  of  evangelical  churches  form  the  most 
detestable  warfare  which  the  devil  has  contrived 
to  kindle  in  our  miserable  world.  And  the  worst 
of  all  is  his  success  in  persuading  multitudes 
of  honest  men,  that  in  carrying  on  the  contest 
of  their  own  sinful  passions,  they  are  "  doing 
valiantly"  for  the  cause  of  God.  And  that  when, 
instead  of  admiring  the  general  symmetry  and 


347 

healthful  appearance  of  other  Christian  bodies, 
they  are  keen,  vigilant,  incessant,  in  looking  for 
a  freckle,  a  wart,  or  a  festering  finger — when 
they  open  their  ears  to  every  slander — when  they 
are  extenuating  all  that  is  good  in  their  neigh- 
bour, and  magnifying  all  that  is  bad — when  they 
are  giving,  with  much  satisfaction,  shrewd  hints 
that  may  leave  a  sting  in  his  soul — when  they 
are  preaching  at  him,  and  praying  at  him;  pour- 
ing out  the  gall  of  their  animosity  in  the  very  pre- 
ence  of  God,  and  before  the  throne  of  his  grace — 
they  are  bearing  a  faithful  testimony  for  Christ 
and  his  truth!  Whether  he  shall  himself  so  ac- 
count of  it,  is  another  question. 

This  system  has  been  tried  long,  and  it  never 
did  any  good  yet.  It  has  reformed  none,  convinc- 
ed none,  enlightened  none.  Let  it  be  given  up, 
and  its  opposite  adopted.  Let  us  shew  our  fel- 
low Christians  that  we  embrace  them  in  the  bow- 
els of  Jesus  Christ — that  we  do  not  consider  "  the 
children's  bread"  on  their  table  as  "  cast  to  the 
dogs."  And  let  us  shew  it  not  by  professions,  but 
by  fact — let  us  eat  of  their  bread  when  they  in- 
vite us ;  and  welcome  them,  in  turn,  to  eat  of  our 
own.  One  year  of  love  will  do  more  towards  set- 
ting us  mutually  right  where  we  are  wrong,  than 
a  millenium  of  wrangling. 

V.  It  is  asserted,  that  "general  communion 


548 

among  visible  Christians  will  not  only  diminish 
the  v^alue,  but  impeach  the  propriety  of  all  that 
service  which,  in  every  age,  the  churches  of  God 
have  rendered  to  pure  and  undefiled  religion  by 
their  judicial  confessions  of  faith."  More  briefly 
thus;  "CathoHck  communion  subverts  confes- 
sions of  faith." 

It  would  be  marvellous  indeed,  if  God's  own 
people  could  not  maintain  a  testimony  for  Aim, 
without  disunion  among  themselves!!  The  whole 
corps  of  infidels  put  together  is  unable  to  produce 
so  conclusive  an  argument  against  the  Christian 
religion  as  a  practical  system.  But  let  us  take 
heed  how  we  strengthen  their  hands  by  granting 
their  assumptions — how  we  confound  a  testimo- 
ny for  God  and  his  truth  with  a  testimony  for  our- 
selves and  our  peculiarities.  Were  it  so ;  were 
confessions  of  faith  designed  to  be  the  shibbo- 
leths, the  symbols,  the  flags,  of  religious,  or  rather 
irreligious^  factions — challenges  to  battle  among 
believers — wedges  of  dissention  to  split  the  church 
of  Christ  into  pieces,  the  objection  would  be 
solid. 

Admitting,  how^ever,  the  general  unity  of  Chris- 
tians in  those  things  which  immediately  concern 
their  common  hope,  it  would  prove,  not  that  ca- 
tholick  communion  is  improper;  but  that  con- 
fessions are  what  some  represent  them  to  be. 


349 

mere  nuisances :  and,  in  that  case,  every  "son  of 
peace"  would  labour  for  their  destruction.  But  if 
they  are  intended,  as  indeed  they  are,  to  proclaim 
wherein  believers  differ  from  the  carnal  world ; 
and  to  be  luminous  rallying  points  of  their  strength 
and  efforts  in  their  conflict  with  the  enemies  of 
our  Lord  and  of  his  Christ ;  it  is  inconceivable 
how  they  should  interfere  with  the  broadest  Chris- 
tian fellowship,  or  the  broadest  Christian  fellow- 
ship with  them.  Even  those  particulars  in  which 
they  might  vary  from  each  other,  would  but  serve 
to  set  off,  in  the  finest  and  most  consolatory  man- 
ner, the  superiour  worth  and  glory  of  their  higher 
agreements ;  and  furnish  a  suitable  occasion  for 
the  exercise  of  that  forbearance  which  is  indis- 
pensable to  "  keeping  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in 
the  bond  of  peace." 

Certain  it  is  that  neither  the  Apostolick  nor  the 
Reformed  churches  found  their  confessions  to  be 
at  war  with  their  communion.  The  former  studi- 
ously avoided,  in  their  "  symbols"  of  the  faith, 
those  inferiour  matters  about  which  opinions  and 
practice  clashed  then  not  less  than  now :  wisely 
confining  their  testimony  to  the  substantial  truths 
of  revelation ;  and  turning  their  united  forces 
against  those  substantial  heresies  which,  by  sap- 
ping the  foundations  of  the  common  salvation, 
aimed  at  the  overthrow  of  the  common  interest. 


350 

The  multiplied  and  essential  corruptions  of 
Popery  called  for  corresponding  confessions  in 
the  Reformed  churches.  But  these,  instead  of 
putting  them  asunder,  brought  them  together; 
and  were  the  very  ground  of  their  confidence, 
communion,  and  co-operation.  The  Lutheran 
church  formed  an  unhappy  exception  :  and  even 
that  exception  would  not  have  existed,  had  the 
spirit  of  her  illustrious  founder  continued  to  per- 
vade her  councils. 

On  this  point  many  of  my  readers  will  be  start- 
led by  what  they  will  think  a  very  strange  asser- 
tion. It  is,  nevertheless,  true ;  and  is  an  induction 
from  facts  of  which  a  number  has  been  already 
detailed.  !t  is,  that  the  churches  most  sound  in 
the  faith,  most  correct  in  their  order,  most  pure 
in  their  worship,  were  also  the  most  liberal  in 
their  communion.  Inquire  at  the  mouth  of  his- 
tory, who,  from  the  dawn  of  the  Reformation 
down  to  the  Westminster  Assembly,  united  the 
most  faithful  testimony  to  Christ  with  the  most 
fervent  charity  to  Christians  ?  Who  were  most 
full  in  their  confession  of  the  truth,  and  most 
catholick  in  their  views  of  church-communion  ? 
Her  answer  is,  They  were  the  Calvinists — they 
were  the  Presbyterians  ! 

But  allowing  the  objection  to  have  much  great- 
er weight  than  it  has,  when  applied  to  churches 


351 

whose  confessions  do  not  perfectly  harmonize 
how  it  is  applicable  to  those  who  are  organized 
under  one  and  the  same  confession  ?  This  is  the 
case  of  several  churches  on  both  sides  of  the 
Atlantick,  which  yet  have  no  inter-communion. 
They  can  surely  make  no  use  of  it  against  each 
other. 

Before  we  quit  the  subject  of  "  confessions  of 
faith,"  it  may  be  proper  to  notice  a  mistake,  which 
is  growing  more  and  more  prevalent,  concerning 
their  intention  and  use :  1  mean  in  their  present 
amplitude.  They  are  supposed,  and  in  some  in- 
stances, are  declared,  to  contain  the  terms  of 
church-communion ;  i.  e.  the  terms  upon  which, 
and  upon  which  alone,  an  individual  can  be  ad- 
mitted into  church-fellowship.  There  are  good 
reasons  for  doubting  whether  such  an  opinion  is 
correct,  and  such  a  declaration  discreet. 

To  prevent  misconceptions,  the  authour  would 
observe,  once  for  all,  that  no  man  is  more  thorough- 
ly convinced  than  himself  of  the  propriety,  utility, 
and  necessity  of  publick  confessions  of  faith; 
nor  is  less  moved  by  the  argumentations  of  their 
adversaries.  But  whether,  like  other  good  things, 
they  are  not  liable  to  abuse — whether  they  have 
not  actually  been  abused — and  whether  the  ap- 
plication professed  to  be  made  of  them,  at  this 

45 


352 

moment,  iti  some  churches,  is  not  an  abuse,  may 
be  worth  considering. 

As  the  "  fixed  testimony"  of  a  church,  "  by 
which  her  principles  are  to  be  tried  ;"  or  as  her 
"  judicial  expression  of  the  sense  in  which  she 
imderstands  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  their  rela- 
tion to  the  Doctrine,  Government,  and  Worship 
of  the  Christian  church,"  when  these  things  are 
matters  of  controversy,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive 
how  a  confession  of  her  faith  can  be  dispensed 
with.  She  must  proclaim  what  she  believes,  and 
means  to  teach.  This  is  her  confession  of  faith ; 
and  is  put  into  the  hands  of  her  officers  to  be  by 
them  inculcated  and  supported.  Nothing  can 
be  more  absurd  than  to  employ  as  preachers  and 
guardians  of  her  religion,  men  who,  for  aught 
she  knows,  may  labour  to  subvert  the  whole  sys- 
tem which  she  is  endeavouring  to  build  up.  She 
has,  therefore,  a  right,  and  it  is  her  duty,  on  the 
ground  of  self-preservation,  as  well  as  of  fidelity 
to  her  king,  to  exact  from  them  an  explicit  avow- 
al of  their  belief  on  all  those  topics  which  more 
nearly  or  remotely  aff*ect  the  main  interests  of 
truth:  and  a  positive,  unequivocating  engage- 
ment to  maintain  them.  For  this  purpose  she 
must  bricg  them  to  a  test;  which  can  be  done  so 
efifectually  in  no  form  as  that  of  requiring  an  ap- 
probation of  her  confession.    The  security  is  not 


353 

iildeed  perfect:  as  some  men  will  make  any  pro- 
fession whatever  for  lucre,  for  distinction,  or  for 
convenience:  and  as  the  convictions  of  others 
may  really  alter.  But  it  is  the  best  which  can  be 
adopted.  It  keeps  the  recreant  always  within  her 
grasp ;  and  it  is  her  own  fault  if,  with  such  a  con- 
trol, she  allows  him  to  poison  the  "  wells  of  sal- 
vation,'' or  to  pollute  their  streams.  In  her  con- 
fession of  faith,  then,  are  strictly  and  indispensa- 
bly, her  terms  of  official  union. 

But  are  these  same  terms  to  regulate  private 
communion  ?  When  they  go  beyond  the  elemen- 
tary doctrines  of  the  gospel — when  they  are  ex- 
panded into  a  comprehensive  system  of  Theolo- 
gy, as  in  the  Westminster  Confession,  ought  they 
to  be  proposed  for  approbation,  in  all  their  lati- 
tude, to  every  one  who  desires  baptism  for  his 
children,  or  a  seat  at  the  table  of  the  Lord? 

The  reader  is  entreated  not  to  be  stumbled  at 
an  answer  which  may  thwart  his  prepossessions ; 
but  to  listen  and  reflect  before  he  pronounces. 
The  answer  is.  No. 

1.  Because  such  was  not  the  original  design  of 
the  Protestant  confessions. 

They  were  intended  to  raise  and  to  display  a 
banner  for  the  truth  of  Christ  which  had  been 
foully  depraved,  as  by  others,  so  especially  by  the 
man  of  sin.    And  while  they  contained  all  those 


354 

cardinal  points  which  are  essential  to  Christian 
faith  and  fellowship ;  they  contained  others,  which 
though  not  thus  essential,  are  nevertheless  impor- 
tant ;  and  worthy  to  be  maintained  with  zeal  and 
constancy. 

2.  Because,  being  thus  constructed,  they  were 
not  in  fact  terms  of  communion  for  private  Chris- 
tians ;  nor  even  for  the  reciprocation  of  ministe- 
rial fellowship ;  as  is  plain — 

From  their  absolute  silence  about  such  a  re- 
quisition— 

From  the  communion  which  subsisted  among 
the  members  of  the  Reformed  churches  notwith- 
standing the  slighter  diversities  in  their  creeds — 
and 

From  the  endeavours  of  the  best  of  them  to 
effect,  in  addition  to  this  communion,  a  complete 
union  of  the  Protestant  interests. 

The  Westminster  Confession  gives  not  the 
most  distant  hint  of  such  a  use.  The  church 
of  Scotland,  herself,  as  has  been  proved,  never 
imposed  it  upon  strangers  ;  no,  nor  upon  her  own 
private  members.  "  In  so  far,"  says  one  of  her 
professors  of  divinity,  in  a  work  expressly  de- 
fending confessions  of  faith,  "  In  so  far  as  is 
known  to  us,  there  is  no  act  of  Assembly,  nor 
even  of  any  inferiour  church-judicature,  establish- 
ing the  Confession  of  Faith  a  term  of  Christian 


355 

communion,  &nd  requiring  an  assent  thereto 
from  Christian  parents  in  order  to  their  being 
admitted  to  all  the  privileges  of  church-commu- 
nion, and  particularly  the  baptism  of  their  chil- 
dren."    And  again ; 

"  As  there  is  no  established  rule,  nor  any  act 
of  Assembly,  confining  the  benefits  of  baptism 
to  the  belief  of  the  several  articles  of  our  Con- 
fession, and  excluding  from  a  participation  of 
this  ordinance  all  persons  w^ho  may  in  some  things 
diifer  from  us;  so  there  was  no  ground  in  fact 
ever  given  to  a  person  to  complain  of  an  arbitrary 
imposition  upon  him  in  this  respect:  Nor  can 
any  man,  so  far  as  w^e  know,  allege,  that  he  ac- 
quainted a  minister  that  he  had  scruples  as  to 
some  articles  of  our  Confession,  or  was  of  a  con- 
trary opinion  to  them;  and,  therefore,  that  he 
could  neither  profess  his  own  belief  of  them,  nor 
engage  to  educate  his  child  in  them,  and  there- 
upon was  denied  access  to  this  sacrament.  On 
the  other  hand,  there  have  been  several  instances 
of  persons  who,  upon  their  desire,  w^ere  gratified 
in  this  particular;  while  none  had  ever  reason  to 
complain  of  a  refusal."*     Such  were  the  views 


*  DuNLOP's  Full  account  of  the  several  ends  and  uses  of  confessions 
of  faith,  &c.  Edin.  1775.  12mo.  p.  240,  1.  This  work  was  first  pub- 
lished at  Edinburgh,  in  1719  ;  thirteen  years  before  Ebenezer  Erskine's 
famous  sermon  which  occasioned  the  SeGession. 


356 

and  practice  of  the  church  of  Scotland  before 
the  Secession. 

3.  Because  they  cannot  be,  in  effect,  terms  of 
Christian  communion. 

You  may  declare  them  to  be  so :  You  may 
pass  Synodical  acts  for  that  purpose.  I  And 
thus  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith,  Cate- 
chisms, Form  of  Church-government,  and  Di- 
rectories for  worship,  are  declaratively  and  legally 
terms  of  permanent  communion  or  membership 
in  the  Associate  Reformed  church.  But  de- 
clarations and  acts  of  Synod  cannot  alter  the 
nature  of  things ;  nor  make  that  to  be  practica- 
ble which  in  itself  is  impracticable.  \  Not  only 
the  attainments,  but  the  faculties  of  the  mass  of 
mankind  must  be  different  from  what  they  ever 
have  been  before  such  extensive  terms  of  com- 
munion can  be  enforced.  It  belongs  not  to 
church-power  to  "  call  things  that  be  not  as 
though  they  were."  Will  a  discreet  man  suppose 
that  every  plain  Christian  who  knows  enough  for 
his  salvation,  and  has  learned  to  "  glorify  God  in 
his  body  and  his  spirit,"  can  also  be  acquaint- 
ed with  the  whole  doctrine  of  those  standards? 
A  work  which  occupied  for  years  the  care  and 
study  of  a  body  of  divines  second  to  none  in  the 
world  ?  which  has  condensed  the  Hterature  and 
labour  of  their  lives ;  and  covers  the  whole  ground 


357 

of  didactick  and  polemick  Theology  ?  Is  it  a 
reasonable  expectation  that  every  plain  Christian, 
however  unlettered,  should  be  able  to  grasp  a 
work  like  this  ?  to  distinguish  its  numerous  pro- 
positions ;  and  to  fathom  their  sense  ?  How  many 
private  members  of  our  churches,  our  best  and 
most  exemplary  members,  could  abide  such  an 
ordeal  ?  Speculative  zeal,  which  is  always  for  car- 
rying matters  with  a  high  hand,  and  is  never 
more  confident  than  when  most  in  the  wrong, 
may  shut  her  eyes  and  stop  her  ears — but  the 
practical  understanding  revolts.  Conscience  and 
common  sense,  when  they  came  into  contact  with 
facts,  have  always  flinched  from  the  fair  appli- 
cation of  such  theoretical  tests.  I  say  theoretical 
tests  ;  for  in  the  case  before  us  they  are  not  carri- 
ed into  effect  by  their  most  strenuous  advocates. 
When  a  common  person  offers  them  his  name  as 
a  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ,  do  they  so  much  as 
pretend  to  measure  his  knowledge  by  the  height, 
and  depth,  and  length,  and  breadth,  of  their  publick 
standards  ?  They  do  not — not  a  man  of  them.  If 
they  did,  and  were  to  reject  the  deficient,  they 
might  resign  their  houses  of  worship  to  the  bats 
at  once.  There  would  be  no  place  for  one  Chris- 
tian in  ten  thousand.  And  were  their  example  uni- 
versal, not  a  church  of  God  would  be  left  stand- 
ing from  the  rising  to  the  setting  sun.    They  act 


358 

very  differently,  and  far  more  wisely.  They  re- 
ceive their  members  upon  a  credible  profession 
of  faith  in  Christ ;  and  in  their  inquiries  into  this 
profession,  they  never  go  into  the  details  of  their 
own  standards.  Those  truths  which  they  distinct- 
ly propose,  and  of  which  they  require  a  con- 
fession, are,  then,  their  real  and  their  only  practi- 
cal test:  and  be  it  what  it  may,  larger  or  less, 
they  do  and  must,  in  their  administration  of  the 
ordinances,  naturally  and  necessarily  cut  down 
their  standards  to  that  size. 

Therefore,  sacramental  communion  on  those 
vital  principles  which  characterize  the  people  of 
God  in  every  age  and  country,  is  not  inconsistent 
with  the  most  perfect  confessions  of  faith ;  nor 
does  it  all  interfere  with  their  proper  use. 

VI.  It  is  alleged  that  "  as  communion  presup- 
poses, and  is  founded  upon,  union;  it  is  a  contra- 
diction to  hold  communion  with  churches  with 
which  w^e  are  not  united :  and,  therefore,  all  such 
communion  is  inconsistent  with  distinct  ecclesi- 
astical organization." 

The  premises  are  granted :  the  conclusions  de- 
nied. Communion  is  indisputably  an  act  and  ex- 
pression of  union.  And  it  is  on  this  very  ground 
that  the  reciprocal  communion  of  Christians  and 
Christian  churches  is  asserted  to  be  both  their  pri- 
vilege and  duty.  They  are  united — they  are  one. 


359 

They  are  one  in  interests  infinitely  more  valuable, 
they  are  united  in  bonds  infinitely  more  strong, 
than  all  the  other  interests  which  subdivide  them ; 
and  all  the  other  bonds  which  unite  their  subdi- 
visions. >For  sectarian  communion  you  must  in- 
deed be  united  in  a  sect;  for  Christian  commu- 
nion, you  must  be  united  in  Christ,  Therefore, 
according  to  the  objection  itself,  if  unity  of  sect 
be  a  sufficient  reason  for  all  sectarian  communion, 
unity  in  Christ  is  a  sufficient  reason  for  all  Chris- 
tian communion.  This  is  our  plea;  and  we  can- 
not be  grieved  at  hearing  it  from  the  mouth  of 
an  opponent. 

But  the  objection  goes  further,  and  maintains 
that  sections  of  the  one  church  of  Christ  cannot 
hold  lawful  communion  with  each  other,  unless 
they  be  also  united  in  one  external  denomination. 
Do  they,  who  argue  thus,  perceive  that  they  as- 
sume the  non-existence  of  the  one  church  of 
Christ  ?  an  entire  change  in  the  nature  of  church 
fellowship  ?  and  the  extinction  of  Christian  cha- 
racter and  right  out  of  the  limits  of  a  particular 
sect?  Upon  no  other  basis  can  the  conclusion 
rest,  that  formal  union  of  sects  in  one  and  the 
same  organical  body,  is  essential  to  their  Chris- 
tian fellowship.  Were  it  so  indeed,  the  hand 
which  guides  this  pen  would  account  itself  super- 
latively honoured  in  putting  the  match  to  a  train 

46 


360 

which  should  explode  under  their  ramparts  and 
citadels,  and  so  break  and  shatter  and  disperse 
them,  that  every  trace  of  their  existence  should 
disappear  from  under  heaven. 

But  the  fallacy  is  palpable. 

To  say  that  communion  is  the  fruit  of  union; 
and  thence  to  argue,  that  something  more  than 
Christian  union  is  necessary  to  Christian  com- 
munion, is  a  sophism  which  can  mislead  no  one 
who  permits  himself  to  think. 

Why  does  not  the  objector  carry  his  doctrine 
through,  and  maintain  that  communion  between 
members  of  different  congregations  is  inconsist- 
ent with  their  distinct  organization  ?  and  that  be- 
fore it  can  be  proper,  they  must  all  be  melted 
down  into  one  congregation  ?    If  you  say  that 
"  they  are  limbs  of  one  larger  body,  and  in  virtue 
of  this  their  union  have,  and  are  bound  to  have, 
communion  with  each  other;"  I  take  my  answer 
from  your  own  lips,  in  your  own  words,  and  re- 
ply, that  "  the  different  Christian  churches  are 
limbs  of  that  one  larger  body,  the  chureh-catho- 
lick;  and  in  virtue  of  this  their  union  are  bound 
to  have  communion  with  each  other."    A  single 
congregation;   an  organized  portion  of  a  sect 
comprising  several  congregations;  the  sect  itself 
comprising  several  such  portions,  are  all  limbs  in 
their  places.  That  one  limb  is  greater  and  ano- 


361 

ther  less,  cannot  alter  the  nature  of  their  relation 
to  their  bodies  respectively.  The  principle  is  one ; 
the  analogy  perfect;  and  the  conclusion  irresisti- 
ble. This  conclusion  is,  that  to  maintain  the  ne- 
cessity of  amalgamating  different  sects  into  one 
sect  in  order  to  communion  between  their  mem- 
bers, is  to  maintain,  at  the  same  time,  the  necessi- 
ty of  amalgamating  different  congregations  into 
one  congregation,  in  order  to  communion  be- 
tween their  members:  And,  that  there  is  no  ar- 
gument for  the  communion  of  different  congre- 
gations founded  upon  their  union  in  one  sect, 
which  is  not  equally  good  for  the  communion  of 
the  sects  themselves  on  account  of  their  union 
in  one  church-catholick. 

Christian  communion,  therefore,  may  subsist 
in  purity  and  power  between  different  sections 
of  the  church-catholick,  without  any  such  union 
as  the  objection  requires.  However  desirable 
such  an  union  be  in  itself;  and  how  extensively 
soever  it  shall  be  effected  when  "the  Lord  shall 
build  up  Zion  and  appear  to  men  in  his  glory," 
there  is  room  at  least  to  doubt  whether  it  would 
now  be  expedient  were  it  even  practicable.  Prac- 
ticable and  expedient  in  some  degree  it  probably 
is  at  the  present  hour ;  and  is  well  worth  the  con- 
sideration of  them  who  perceive  "  how  good  and 
how  pleasant  it  is  for  brethren  to  dwell  together 


362 

in  unity."  On  a  large  scale  the  churches  are 
not  ripe  for  it.  There  are  opinions,  feelings,  habits, 
which  must  be  reduced  much  nearer  than  they 
are  to  some  common  standard,  before  it  could  be 
attempted  without  the  danger  of  doing  more 
harm  than  good.  But  this  is  no  reason  against 
the  cultivation  of  friendly  intercourse — against 
what  may  be  called  church-hospitality — against 
the  most  ungrudging  fellowship  in  holy  ordinan- 
ces, as  opportunity  serves.  They  who  should 
live  very  uncomfortably  together  under  the  same 
roof,  may  yet  be  excellent  neighbours;  firm 
friends  ;  studious  in  the  exchange  of  kind  offices: 
and  their  civilities,  in  process  of  time,  may  im- 
prove into  alliances  of  mutual  benefit. 

Under  this  head,  viz.  the  necessity  of  union  in 
sect  as  a  basis  of  church-communion,  there  has 
been  started  a  difficulty  of  so  singular  a  cast, 
that  one  hardly  knows  whether  to  pass  it  by  with 
a  smile,  or  to  give  it  a  serious  answer.  The  for- 
mer is  best  merited;  the  latter  more  respectful. 
It  is  said,  then,  that  "  by  admitting  to  our  fel- 
lowship persons  who  are  not  members  of  our 
church,  we  make  an  unjust  and  invidious  distinc- 
tion in  their  favour.  Our  own  members  being 
subjects  of  our  discipline ;  the  others  not.  So  that 
we  exact  harder  conditions  of  communion  from 
our  own  family  than  we  do  from  strangers." 


363 

God  has  put  his  chastisements,  whereof  the 
discipline  of  his  house  administered  for  edifica- 
tion and  not  for  destruction  is  a  part,  among  the 
'privileges  of  his  people.  Art  thou  not  surprised, 
Christian  reader,  to  hear  it  mentioned  as  an 
hardship  f  I  see  the  blush  mantling  on  thy  cheek : 
and  shall  spare  thee  the  pain  of  dwelling  on  so 
unseemly  an  imputation. 

But  there  is  a  mistake.  If  by  dishonouring  their 
high  vocation,  your  guests  should  deserve  to  be 
excluded  from  the  communion  of  the  faithful, 
what  is  to  hinder  their  exclusion  from  yours  ? 
This  would  be  decisive  discipline,  and  as  easily 
exercised  towards  them,  as  towards  your  own 
members.  And  whence  arose  the  notion  that  an 
offending  brother  cannot  be  disciplined  by  any 
authority  but  that  of  the  particular  congregation 
or  sect  to  which  he  more  especially  belongs  ? 
When  he  can  be  referred  thither  without  much 
inconvenience,  it  is  altogether  preferable.  But 
how  did  he  acquire  a  right  to  transgress  with  im- 
punity, and  be  from  under  the  coercion  of  his 
master's  law,  every  where  but  within  his  own 
precincts  ?  And  when  did  the  church-cathohck 
lose  the  right  of  restraining  a  disorderly  member 
by  the  agency  of  any  one  particular  church  in 
which  he  may  have  enjoyed  her  communion? 
No  man,  whom  she  has  once  acknowledged,  can 


364 

free  himself  from  his  responsibility  in  any  part 
of  the  world.  A  single  act  of  communion  in  her 
peculiar  mercies  binds  him  as  firmly  to  her  au- 
thority as  ten  thousand.  And  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt  that  an  individual  wearing  and 
disgracing  the  Christian  name,  provided  his 
church-membership  be  ascertained,  may,  according 
to  the  statutes  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom,  be 
called  to  account,  reproved,  excommunicated, 
by  any  Christian  church  on  the  spot  where  he 
happens  to  be,  even  without  an  act  of  formal  com- 
munion there ;  much  more  then  after  such  an  act. 
Our  confusion,  perplexity,  errours,  weakness,  un- 
faithfulness, on  this  and  other  great  points  of 
Christian  order,  we  owe  to  our  schisms  :  which, 
if  they  have  not  banished  the  doctrine,  have 
nearly  obliterated  the  sense,  of  the  church's 
UNITY. 

VII.  It  is  objected  that  "  whatever  may  have 
been  the  condition  of  primitive  times,"  (in  which 
c/iwrc^-communion  was  Catholick-communion,) 
"  the  state  of  the  church  is  so  greatly  altered  as 
to  make  the  imitation  of  them  inexpedient,  if 
not  impracticable,  now." 

That  the  imitation  is  not "  impracticable,"  ap- 
pears from  the  complaint  against  some  evangeli- 
cal churches  at  New- York  and  elsewhere— their 
offence  consisting  precisely  in  the  fact  of  such 


365 

imitation.  That  it  is  "  inexpedient,"  is  thus 
far  refuted  by  experience.  No  measure  of  more 
auspicious  influence  within  its  sphere  was  ever 
adopted.  Ask  the  Christians  immediately  con- 
cerned. 

To  ground  the  impropriety  of  Catholick  com- 
munion upon  the  difference  between  the  present 
and  primitive  state  of  the  church,  is  either  to  be- 
tray lamentable  ignorance ;  or  to  convert  sin  into 
an  argument  for  its  own  justification. 

It  has  been  demonstrated  over  and  over,  that 
there  existed  in  the  primitive,  and  even  apos- 
tolical church,  causes  of  separation  much  more 
weighty  than  those  which  some  denominations 
now  assign  for  refusing  the  communion  of  others. 
Yet  no  separation  took  place:  no  communion 
was  refused ;  except  by  some  who  were  held  to 
be  deserters  from  the  ''  city  of  God,"  and  whose 
"  memorial  has  perished  with  them." 

"  But  we  are  separated — we  are  broken  up  in- 
to a  variety  of  sects — we  have  ceased  from  such 
catholick  fellowship ;  and  our  circumstances,  in 
this  view,  are  materially  different  from  those  of 
the  primitive  church" — 

True:  and  the  difference  is  your  reproach — 
your  shame — your  crime.  You  have  violated 
the  commandment  of  your  Lord  and  Saviour — 
you  have  conspired  against  the  unity  of  his 


sm 

kingdom — you  have  lacerated  and  mangled  his 
glorious  body — you  have  slandered  the  spirit 
of  his  gospel — you  have  given  occasion  to  his 
enemies  to  blaspheme — and  you  plead  this  un- 
hallowed condition  into  which  your  disobedience 
has  brought  you,  as  a  reason  for  reinaining  in  it ! 
No,  Sin  shall  not  be  its  own  apology.  "  We  have 
been  «fMiWc^  to  falsehood,  to  knavery,  to  unclean- 
ness ;  therefore  we  may  continue  to  be  false, 
knavish,  unclean" — is  just  as  good  an  argument, 
and  will  go  just  as  far  at  the  tribunal  of  God,  as, 
"  We  have  split  ourselves  up  into  sects :  we  have 
kept  away  from  our  Lord's  table  among  his 
acknowledged  disciples :  we  have  shut  them 
out,  in  our  turn,  from  his  table  among  us — there- 
fore we  must  go  on  in  our  wonted  course!"  Must 
you  indeed  ?  A  rectified  conscience  would  draw 
quite  an  opposite  inference.  It  would  teach  you 
to  say,  "  The  time  past  of  our  lives  may  suffice 
us  to  have  lived  in  disunion,  suspicion,  and  strife. 
Let  us  now  '  search  and  try  our  ways,'  and  en- 
deavour henceforward  to  '  walk  in  love  as  Christ 
also  hath  loved  us'." 

That  there  are  obstacles  to  be  surmounted  in 
forming  and  executing  so  divine  a  purpose,  is 
undeniable.  But  the  greatest  of  them  all  is  the 
most  sinful — the  ivant  of  loye — and  therefore  the 
want  of  w  ILL.     Remove  these,  and  the  rest  will 


367 

vanish  almost  of  their  own  accord.  So  the  pri- 
mitive Christians  found  it:  so  did  the  Protestant 
Reformers:  and  so  have  others  who  cherished, 
though  in  a  lower  degree,  their  brotherly  sj3irit. 

The  facts  are  numerous  and  stubborn  ;  but  the 
argument  from  them  is  evaded  by  a  distinction 
which  must  briefly  be  examined.    For  it  is  said, 

VIII.  That  "the  sentiments  and  examples  of 
holy  men  and  evangelical  churches  in  latter  days, 
to  which  the  friends  of  Catholick  communion  so 
confidently  appeal,  were  adapted  to  extraordinary 
circumstances ;  and  are  inapplicable  to  a  regular, 
settled  state  of  the  church." 

It  is  clear  as  the  light,  that  if  this  distinction  be 
unsound,  its  advocates  cannot  escape  from  the 
dilemma  of  either  aspersing  those  whom  they 
profess  to  honour,  or  convicting  themselves  of 
schismatical  conduct.  They  ought  to  have  been 
sure  of  their  ground  before  they  ventured  upon  it 
with  so  valuable  a  stake.  Let  us  try  whether  it 
will  bear  their  weight. 

The  first  thing  which  strikes  us  is,  that  it  should 
represent  division,  faction,  rents,  wranglings,  as 
suited  to  an  ordinary,  regular,  settled  state  of  the 
church!  and  should  allow  nothing  but  extra- 
ordinary circumstances  to  justify  communion 
among  her  members  of  different  denominations ! 
That  the  fellowship  of  Christians  and  Christian 

47 


368 

churches  with  each  other,  as  such,  is  disor- 
derly and  unlawful,  except  in  extraordmary  cir- 
cumstances  ! !  O  Saviour,  is  such  thy  church,  and 
thy  law  ? 

But  "  the  legs  of  the  lame  are  not  equal."  If 
this  distinction  is  just,  what  becomes  of  the  plea 
on  which  our  opposing  brethren  rest  the  chief  me- 
rits of  their  cause,  viz.  that  by  communion  with 
other  churches  than  our  own,  or  with  their  mem- 
bers, we  partake  of  their  sins  ? 

That  which  is  unlawful  in  itself  can  never  be 
rendered  lawful  by  circumstances.  But  all  par- 
taking of  other  men's  sins  is  unlawful  in  itself. 
Therefore,  if  Catholick  communion  involves  such 
a  participation,  it  is  unlawful  in  itself,  and  cannot 
be  justified  by  extraordinary  circumstances. 
Upon  this  principle  the  communion  of  the  Pro- 
testant churches  was  a  communion  in  each 
other's  sin!!  Which  part  will  our  brethren  take? 
Will  they  give  up  their  main  argument  against 
the  intercommunion  of  acknowledged  Christians  ? 
or  will  they  lay  so  foul  a  charge  at  the  door  of 
those  glorious  men  who  reformed  the  church  of 
God  at  the  expense  of  their  heart's  blood  ? 

But  the  Reformers  themselves  were  of  another 
mind.  They  put  the  lawfulness  or  unlawful- 
ness— the  propriety  or  impropriety  of  church- 
communion,  not  upon  the  footing  of  ordinary  or 


369 

extraordinary  circumstances,  but  upon  the  footing 
of  the  common  faith,  Thej  did  so  in  their  pub- 
lick  confessions,  wherein  they  show  what  the 
church  is,  and  ought  to  be,  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures. They  laid  the  foundations  of  her  com- 
munion in  her  unity  as  the  body  of  Christ.  Their 
practice  grew  out  of  their  doctrine^  not  out  of 
their  circumstances.  They  did  not  in  one  breath 
maintain  the  unity  of  the  church ;  in  another, 
deny  that  unity  to  be  a  sufficient  basis  for  the 
communion  of  her  members  :  then,  in  the  face 
of  their  own  denial,  actually  hold  such  commu- 
nion; and,  to  crown  all,  justify  their  conduct  by 
their  extraordinary  circumstances !  Such  incon- 
sistency, confusion,  and  contradiction,  never  dis- 
graced the  men  whom  the  "  Spirit  of  judgment 
and  of  burning"  employed  to  purify  the  house  of 
God.  Their  faith,  their  profession,  and  their  ex- 
ample corresponded.  What  they  believed  they 
taught ;  and  what  they  taught  they  exemplified. 
Because  they  believed  the  church  of  Christ  to  be 
one,  their  communion  embraced  her  visible 
members. 

One  objection  is  left. — It  is  said, 

IX.  That  "  all  Christians  being  one  in  spirit, 
the  best  ends  of  communion  may  be  answered  in 
their  present  state  of  separation,  without  the  evils 
incident  to  its  pubhck  extension." 


370 

That  believers  have  a  spiritual  fellou  ship  with 
each  other  as  living  members  of  the  one  living 
body  of  Christ,  is  a  truth  not  less  full  of  consola- 
tion, than  their  outward  distance  and  divisions  are 
full  of  discomfort  and  shame.  But  how  can  this 
be  a  substitute  for  their  visible  fellowship  in  ordi- 
nances which  are  designed  to  display  and  pro- 
mote it  ?  A  communion  with  the  whole  church 
not  to  be  exemplified !  a  communion  lawful  and 
of  high  privilege,  forbidden  to  be  expressed  in 
that  form  which  the  master  appointed  for  the 
very  purpose  of  expressing  it !  How  is  it  to  be 
kept  up  ?  If  one  Christian  or  church  may  thus 
commune  with  another,  while  the  external  evi- 
dence thereof  is  not  only  withheld  but  prohibit- 
ed, so  may  another ;  so  may  a  thousand  others; 
so  may  all ;  and  the  visible  church  vanishes  from 
among  men!  Nay,  if  the.  objection  before  us  is 
of  any  weight  or  value  whatever,  it  avails  much 
more  than  its  authours  would  be  willing  to  ac- 
cept. Carry  it  through — Turn  Quakers  at  once 
— Discard  your  ministry  and  your  sacraments — 
Fellowship  in  spirit  will  answer  your  best  ends. 
And  you  will  have  no  more  trouble  on  the  sub- 
iect  of  church-communion ! 


371 


PART  IV. 


It  remains  to  trace  the  consequences  of  secta- 
rian, as  opposed  to  Catholick,  communion. 

These  may  be  viewed  in  relation  to  ourselves 
— to  the  church  of  God  at  large — and  to  the  sur- 
rounding world. 

To  ourselves,^ 

1st.  The  first  and  most  obvious  consequence  is 
an  utter  self-excision  or  excommunication  from  all 
the  rest  of  Christ's  church  upon  earth. 

That  such  is  the  fact,  it  would  be  illuminating 
the  sun  to  prove.  For  if  there  be  on  earth  Chris- 
tian churches  beside  our  own ;  and  if  we  will 
have  no  communion  with  them,  to  what  less  does 
our  conduct  amount  than  an  open  renunciation 
of  all  visible  concern  with  them  in  the  kingdom 
of  God  ?  If,  indeed,  we  do  not  hold  them  to  be 
Christian  churches — if  we  claim  the  sole  posses- 
sion of  that  blessed  character;  and  arrogate  to 
ourselves  the  exclusive  privilege  of  being  the 
^'  General  Assembly  and  Church  of  the  First- 


*  The  authour  speaks  in  the  person  of  any  sect  which  is  in  the  habit 
of  confining  its  fellowship  to  its  own  members. 


372 

Born,"  we  may  escape  from  the  charge :  But  if 
we  dare  not  proceed  to  such  a  fearful  length,  our 
escape  is  impossible. 

Here  then  we  are,  in  a  state  of  excommu- 
nication: or,  if  you  prefer  the  term,  in  a  state 
of  non-communion  with  the  church  of  the 
living  God.  Isolated  by  our  own  act — under 
a  practical,  and  in  some  instances  a  doctri- 
nal, protest  against  fellowship  with  her  in 
ordinances  which  we  enjoy  only  as  a  part  of 
the  great  whole.  Yet  with  the  "  great  whole," 
we  as  a  part  will  have  no  intercourse — will  have 
nothing  to  do.  Is  fellowship,  then,  with  the  ac- 
knowledged church  of  God — fellowship  direct 
and  avowed  before  angels  and  men,  so  vile  in  our 
eyes?  Are  we  so  lost  to  all  sense  of  the  beauty, 
efficacy,  and  glory  of  the  "unity  of  the  Spirit,"  as 
to  be  satisfied  with  our  disunion  ?  and  so  infatu- 
ated as  to  imagine  that  in  fostering  it  we  are  "do- 
ing God  service  ?"  Shall  a  church  turn  her  back 
upon  the  whole  visible  interest  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
in  the  world,  by  refusing  the  "right  hand  of  fel- 
lowship" to  every  portion  of  it  but  her  own — and 
thus  turn  her  back  upon  all  the  manifestations  of 
his  power,  grace,  love,  faithfulness,  which  he 
there  displays,  and  still  hope  for  his  blessing  upon 
herself?  hope  for  his  presence,  for  his  Spirit,  for 
that  holy  "  dew"  under  which  she  "  shall  grow  as 


373 

the  lily,  and  cast  forth  her  roots  as  Lebanon ;  her 
branches  shall  spread,  and  her  beauty  shall  be  as 
the  olive  tree,  and  her  smell  as  Lebanon?"  Has 
she  a  right  in  such  a  temper  to  hope  for  such 
things  ?  Let  the  question  be  answered  by  them 
who  have  life  enough  left  to  tremble  at  that  word 
of  the  Lord,  "  Whoso  shall  offend  one  of  these  lit- 
"  tie  ones  which  believe  in  me,  it  were  better  for 
"  him  that  a  mill-stone  were  hanged  about  his 
"  neck,  and  that  he  were  drowned  in  the  depth 
"  of  the  sea." 

2d.  Our  sectarian  communion  stamps  the 
brand  of  inconsistency^  and  throws  an  air  oi  insin- 
cerity^ upon  our  most  solemn  professions. 

We  talk  of  the  Catholick  church— of  her  unity 
— of  her  character — of  her  prerogatives;  and  yet 
ttcr  as  if  these  were  unmeaning  terms;  and  all 
that  we  have  to  say  of  her,  an  ^'idle  tale."  In 
words  we  found  our  title  to  our  church-privi- 
leges in  our  union  with  her — in  deeds  we  avoid 
every  publick,  social  expression  of  that  union,  as 
if  it  were  our  dishonour,  and  might  prove  to  be 
our  ruin.  We  laud  her  to  the  heavens  in  theory  : 
we  call  her  Christ's  spouse  and  our  mother— in 
practice  we  shun  her  embrace,  her  touch,  her  at- 
mosphere cane  pejus  et  angue  ;  as  if  she  were  a 
rabid  or  venomous  animal.  There  is  not  a  room 
in  God's  house,  a  place  in  his  temple,  a  province 


874 

in  his  kingdom,  fit  for  us  to  inhabit,  or  even  to 
visit,  but  the  one  in  which  we  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  dwell.  When  we  spread  our  table,  we 
call  it  the  table  of  the  Lord,  We  invite  his  friends 
and  prohibit  his  enemies,  according  to  his  own 
rules.  But  any  who  should  imagine  that  we  mean 
nothing  more  than  we  say — that  our  invitation  is 
honestly  intended  for  our  master's  friends;  and, 
acceding  to  our  own  declared  conditions,  should 
tfike  us  at  our  word,  w^ould  grievously  mistake. 
They  would  find  that  not  one  in  ten  thousand  of 
them  that  "  love  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  and  en- 
deavour to  "  walk  even  as  he  also  walked,"  comes 
within  our  scope — that  all  our  descriptions  of 
Christians  are  only  for  Christians  of  our  sect.  Is 
this  "simplicity  and  godly  sincerity?"  Are  unbe- 
lieving eyes  shut  to  the  contradiction,  or  believing 
hearts  untouched  by  the  insult?  Be  fair  at  least. 
Come  out  openly  and  tell  your  hearers,  that  how- 
ever your  language  may  sound,  you  mean  by  the 
people  of  God,  neither  more  nor  less  than  the 
members  of  your  own  church !  You  startle ;  you 
recoil;  you  sicken.  Why?  Because  the  injustice 
is  too  flagrant,  the  inconsistency  too  gross,  to  bear 
the  light.  And  shall  we  pertinaciously  do,  under 
cover  of  a  flimsy  veil,  that  which  we  have  not 
the  courage  so  much  as  to  look  at  when  it  stands 
before  us  with  the  veil  stripped  off? 


375 

3d.  Upon  the  individuals  of  a  sect,  their  re- 
stricted communion  exerts  an  unhappy  influence, 
with  regard 

To  their  religious  intellect — 

To  their  practical  judgment — and 

To  the  direction  of  their  zeal. 

Upon  the  religious  intellect  sectarian  feel- 
ings and  fellowship  produce  an  eflect  analo- 
gous to  that  of  the  division  of  labour  upon  me- 
chanical ingenuity.  By  concentrating  its  opera- 
tions in  a  few  points,  or  perhaps  in  a  single  one, 
they  render  it  peculiarly  acute  and  discriminating 
within  those  limits,  at  the  expense  of  enfeebling 
or  destroying  its  general  power.  Conversations 
are  cherished ;  books  read  ;  time  expended ;  fa- 
culties employed ;  not  for  the  purpose  of  acquir- 
ing larger  views  of  the  Redeemer's  truth,  grace, 
kingdom,  and  glory:  but  for  the  purpose  of  train- 
ing more  accurate  disputants  upon  the  heads 
of  sectarian  collision.  Here  men  distinguish  them- 
selves ;  here  they  shine ;  here  they  gratify  their 
vanity^  which  they  often  mistake  for  their  con- 
science': "What  difference,"  exclaimed  a  zealous 
member  of  a  nameless  judicatory,  when  he  was 
contending  for  a  'testimony'  over  and  above  the 
recognised  confession  of  faith,  "  what  difference 
will  there  be  between  you  and  the  General  As 
sembly,  if  you  have  not  a  testimony  ?"  Such  an 

48 


376 

exclamation  from  the  mouth  of  a  man  otherwise 
reasonable  and  judicious,  is  a  volume.  It  shows 
how  the  i)arty'Soul  is  narrowed  down:  and  how 
all  its  perceptions  are  directed  to  those  things 
which  put  Christians  asunder,  instead  of  those 
things  which  should  bring  them  together;  and 
which,  for  their  importance,  may  not,  without  de- 
gradation, be  named  in  company  with  the  causes 
of  their  disunion.  With  one,  the  watch-word  is 
*^our  excellent,  our  apostolical  church" — with 
another,  "the  mode  of  baptism" — with  a  third, 
"  the  solemn  league  and  covenant" — with  a 
fourth,  "the  Burgess  oath" — with  a  fifth,  "psalmo- 
dy." Upon  these  subjects,  and  such  as  these, 
their  respective  partisans  collect  their  informa- 
tion and  their  strength — they  whet  each  other 
till  they  become  "as  sharp  as  a  needle."  A  stran- 
ger hearing  them  talk  on  their  favourite  topics, 
would  be  astonished  at  their  understanding  and 
answers.  But  lead  them  away  from  their  pecu- 
liarities to  those  things  which  concern  the  king- 
dom of  God — which  are  common  to  the  house- 
hold of  faith — which  require  a  general  Christian 
mind — and  how  lamentable,  for  the  most  part,  is 
the  falling  off !  "  We  speak  that  we  do  know,  and 
testify  that  w^e  have  seen."  And  here  is  the  expla- 
nation of  that  ordinary  phenomenon,  that  the  rise 
of  party-sense  is  the  fall  of  sacred  knowledge. 
Sectarian  fires  put  out  Christian  light. 


IF 


377 

Nor  does  the  practical  judgment  suffer  less. 
This  is  clearly  seen  in  the  estimate  Avhich  animat- 
ed sectarians  form  of  character.  The  good  quali- 
ties of  their  own  adherent  they  readily  perceive, 
admire,  and  extol.  His  failings  they  endure  with 
patience ;  and  his  faults,  which  they  dare  not  jus- 
tify, they  can  overlook  and  extenuate.  But  should 
he  quit  their  connexion,  the  first  are  disparaged, 
the  second  are  no  longer  tolerable,  and  the  third 
swell  into  crimes.  On  the  other  hand;  Virtues 
and  graces  in  a  different  party  they  are  apt  to  ad- 
mit with  reluctance  ;  and  rarely  without  qualifi- 
cation. It  shall  go  hard  if  some  "  dead  fly"  do 
not  taint  the  "  good  ointment" — if  some  scrupu- 
lous "  but,"  some  "fear,"  some  "wish,"  do  not 
insinuate  a  douht  where  there  is  no  room  for  de- 
nial;  and  relieve  them  from  the  pain,  by  throw- 
ing a  cloud  over  the  lustre,  of  excellencies  not 
their  own.  But  lo !  all  is  altered!  The  light  which 
only  dazzled,  grows  suddenly  mild  and  cheering! 
Our  breasts  fill  with  the  "  milk  of  human  kind- 
ness ;"  and  we  welcome  to  our  hearts  the  very 
man  whom  a  week  before  we  eyed  askaunt,  and 
should  have  thought  to  be  a  "  spot  in  our  feast 
of  charity!"  Nay,  we  often  are  summarily  con- 
vinced that  a  person  of  dubious  character  has 
been  injured  and  persecuted.  Our  inquiries  are 
conducted  with  the  nicest  delicacy.     So  gentle 


378 

our  temper!  so  charitable  our  constructions  !  so 
large  our  allowance  for  infirmity !  so  deep  our 
sympathy !  Whence  the  miracle  ?  Has  a  seraph, 
with  fire  from  the  altar  of  Gocl,  touched  these 
men  of  unclean  lips,  and  taken  away  the  stains 
which  alarmed  our  purity  ?  Oh  no !  they  are  pre- 
cisely what  they  were.  Wherefore,  then,  this 
change  in  eye-sight,  in  feelings,  in  behaviour  ? 
Simple  inquirer,  thou  knowest  nothing  of  party- 
magick!  They  have  come,  or  are  coming,  or 
are  expected  to  come,  over  to  US. 

With  such  a  perversion  of  the  judgm.ent  it  is 
impossi bJe  that  2:e«/ should  be  well  directed  either 
in  the  choice  of  its  objects,  or  in  the  mode  of  at- 
taining them.  The  memory  of  an  observer  who 
only  glances  over  the  scenes  which  pass  before 
him  can  furnish  many  examples  of  passions  ex- 
cited, principles  sacrificed,  and  efforts  wasted, 
for  the  sake  of  party-baubles ;  while  interests  of 
primary  importance  to  the  glory  of  earth  and 
heaven  are  neglected  or  thrust  aside.  It  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  nature  of  our  faculties  and  affec- 
tions to  pursue  great  and  little  things  with  equal 
ardour.  He  who  is  occupied  with  the  little,  can- 
not rise  to  the  great.  He  who  rises  to  the  great, 
cannot  sink  down  to  the  little.  A  candidate  for 
empire  will  not  fight  for  toys.  He  who  can  fight 
for  toys  is  unfit  for  empire.     The  man  of  "broad 


879 

phylacteries"  will  give  himself  no  trouble  about 
the  "robe  of  righteousness ;"  the  self-applauding 
"  tither  of  mint  and  anise  and  cummin,"  has  not 
room  in  his  soul  for  "judgment  and  mercy  and 
faiih."     Therefore  it  happens,  that  in  proportion 
as  the  spirit  of  sect  gets  into  a  church,  the  spi- 
rit of  the  gospel  goes  out.  Anxiety  about  her  pe- 
culiarities becomes  a  substitute  for  the  power  of 
personal  rehgion.     The  noisy  champion  of  her 
pre-eminence,  the  proud  observer  of  her  ritual, 
will  be  a  singular  exception  to  a  general  rule,  if 
he  do  not  contribute  little  to  the  prosperity,  and 
less  to  the  ornament,  of  the  church  of  God.     A 
sanctimonious  child  of  tradition,  who  counts  it  a 
mortal  sin  to  eat  flesh  on  Friday,  and  dispenses 
with  any  precept  of  the  decalogue  that  stands  in  the 
way  of  his  gratification,  is  not  an  absolute  rarity. 
The  furious  advocate,  and  the  furious  enemy,  of  a 
liturgy,  are  in  danger  of  being  alike  estranged 
from  the  worship  of  God  "  in  spirit  and  in  truth." 
Nor  is  it  a  chimerical  fear,  that  in  the  hot  conten- 
tions about  psalmody,  which  have  distracted  and 
disgraced  some  of  the  American  churches,  the 
praises  of  both  parties  may,  at  times,  have  died 
away  without  "entering  into  the  ears  of  the  Lord 
of  Sabaoth."     It  is  a  terrifying  truth  that  living 
godliness  languishes  and  decays  in  some  of  the 
"most  straitest  sects  of  our  rehgion,"  their  own 


380 

members  being  judges ;  and  is  succeded  by  hard- 
faced  formality.  So  that  the  complaint  uttered 
more  than  a  century  ago  by  the  venerable  Oiverij 
is  not  inapplicable  now.  "  Whilst  men  have  con- 
tended about  ordinances  and  institutions,  forms 
and  ways  of  religion,  they  have  grown  careless 
and  regardless,  as  unto  personal  holy  conversa- 
tion, to  their  ruin.  They  have  seemed  like  keepers 
of  a  vineyard^  hut  their  own  vineyard  they  have  not 
kept.  How  many  have  we  seen  withering  away 
into  a  dry  sapless  frame,  under  an  hot,  contending, 
disputing  spirit  about  ways  and  differences  of 
worship?  Whilst  they  have  been  intent  on  one 
part  of  profession,  the  other  of  more  importance 
hath  been  neglected."* 

This  witness  is  true.  And  what  is  yet  worse, 
with  such  confessions  from  time  to  time  on  their 
lips,  they  proceed  in  the  very  same  course ;  and 
instead  of  awakening  to  a  just  sense  of  their  sin 
and  folly,  they  "  love  to  have  it  so ;"  and  hold  as 
their  enemies,  and  as  the  enemies  of  good  order, 
all  who  endeavour  to  cease  from  their  "jang- 
lings ;"  and  who,  laying  greater  stress  upon  the 
bond  of  their  union  in  him,  than  upon  the  party- 
coloured  thread  of  ecclesiastical  faction,  stretch 
out  the  hand  of  fellowship  to  them  "  who  love 

*  OnHeb.  ch.iv.  1.  vol.2.  194.  fol. 


381 

the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity."     "  This  is  a 
lamentation  ;  and  shall  be  for  a  lamentation." 

II.  Upon  the  church  at  large  the  system  of  sec- 
tarian fellowship  operates  with  a  most  baneful 
power. 

1.  It  is  a  practical  rejection  of  her  unitij.  How 
she  can  be  one^  and  yet  sundered  into  a  thousand 
pieces — how  her  parts  constitute  a  beautiful  har- 
monious whole^  while  they  are  cJlowed  to  have 
no  more  visible  conjunction  than  if  they  were  des- 
titute of  all  affinity,  is  a  paradox  beyond  compre- 
hension. To  cut  a  man  off,  by  excommunication, 
from  the  whole  church,  supposes  her  to  be  one : 
Then  to  refuse  him,  while  he  retains  his  standing, 
the  benefits  of  communion  with  the  whole,  sup- 
poses her  not  to  be  one.  Again,  to  admit  him, 
professedly,  into  that  communion,  and  preclude 
him  from  the  use  of  it  except  in  a  little  corner,,  is 
at  once  to  admit  and  to  deny  her  unity,  and  to  play 
the  robber  with  his  privileges :  mocking  him  with 
sonorous  titles  which  mean  nothing.  And  to  make 
unity  oisect  necessary  to  communion  in  the  churchy 
is  to  take  her  fellowship  off  from  the  basis  on 
which  her  master  laid  it,  her  Catholick  unity;  and 
to  rest  it  upon  a  basis  of  our  own  making,  directly 
the  contrary  to  his,  viz.  her  schisms;  i.  e.  to  found 
all  her  actual  communion  in  the  principle  of  her 


382 

disunion.  In  the  mouths  of  men  who  behave 
thu,s,vvhat  intelligible  sense  cr.n  be  annexed  to 
the  phrase,  "  imity  of  the  cJutrch  V 

2.  Sectarian  communion  breaks  up  the  charity 
which  ought  to  subsist  between  all  the  members 
of  the  body  of  Christ — 

In  their  mutual  benevolence  : 

In  their  sense  of  a  common  interest : 

In  the  support  which  each  should  receive  from 
the  other:  and 

In  their  co-operation  to  promote  the  kingdom 
of  God. 

1st.  The  restricted  communion  of  sects  is  in- 
compatible with  their  mutual  benevolence. 

It  is  not  in  the  nature  of  things  that  men  should 
avoid  each  others  company ;  should  strive  perti- 
naciously for  the  mastery;  should  put  upon  each 
other  marks  of  publick  dishonour;  and  yet  their 
"  brotherly  love  continue."  The  most  amicable 
controversies  are  dangerous.  They  seldom  end 
as  they  begin.  An  argument  between  friends  is 
prone  to  gender  animosity  :  and  if  they  separate 
with  excited  feelings,  alienation  and  enmity  too 
frequently  follow.  It  is  so  with  collective  bodies. 
When  they  are  once  apart,  they  gradually  recede 
further  and  further  from  each  other.  New  points 
of  discrepancy  arise  ;  create  new  subjects  of  con- 
tention ;  open  new  sources  of  crimination ;  gather 


383 

new  faggots  for  the  flame  of  party-passions ; 
present  new  obstacles  to  concord ;  and  thus  de- 
face the  fairest  feature  of  Christianity — "  love  to 
the  brethren."  How  sadly  this  has  been  verified 
needs  no  proof.  "This,"  saith  Dr.  Owen,  "is  that 
whereon  the  Lord  Christ  hath  laid  the  weight  of 
the  manifestation  of  his  glory  in  the  world:  name- 
ly, the  love  that  is  among  his  disciples ;  which 
was  foretold  as  the  peculiar  glory  of  his  rule  and 
kingdom.  But  there  are  only  a  few  footsteps  now 
left  of  it  in  the  visible  church  ;  some  marks  only, 
that  there  it  hath  been,  and  dwelt  of  old.  It  is,  as 
unto  its  lustre  and  splendour,  retired  to  Heaven  ; 
abiding  in  its  power  and  efficacious  exercise  only 
in  some  corners  of  the  earth,  and  secret  retire- 
ments. Envy,  Wrath,  Selfishness,  Love  of  the 
World,  with  Coldness  in  all  the  concerns  of  reli- 
gion, have  possessed  the  place  of  it.  And  in  vain 
shall  men  wrangle  and  contend  about  their  differ- 
ences in  opinion,  faith,  and  worship,  pretending 
to  design  the  advancement  of  religion  by  impos- 
ing their  persuasions  on  others :  Unless  this  holy 
love  be  again  re-introduced  among  all  them  who 
profess  the  name  of  Christ,  all  the  concerns  of 
religion  will  more  and  more  run  into  ruin."* 
One  would  imagine  that  churches  of  the  pre- 


*  On  Heb.  xiii.  i. 
49 


384 

sent  day  had  been  sitting  for  their  picture  to  this 
great  master  of  moral  painting.  Yet,  with  thank- 
fulness to  the  God  of  peace,  the  likeness  must  be 
acknowledged  to  be  less  striking  than  it  was  some 
few  years  since;  although  too  exact,  even  now, 
to  be  disputed  as  if  it  were  not  drawn  from  life 
with  the  pencil  of  truth. 

One  very  remarkable  circumstance  here  de- 
serves our  notice.  Kind  affections  between 
churches  and  their  members  have  decreased  in 
the  midst  of  eulogies  upon  the  grace  of  love  ;  co- 
gent arguments  on  its  importance  ;  and  pathetick 
persuasives  to  its  exercise.  How  has  this  happen- 
ed ?  "  The  plain  reason  of  it  is,  because  the  love 
which  men  so  contend  for,  is  confined  to  that 
practice  in  and  of  ecclesiastical  communion,  whose 
measures  they  have  fixed  to  themselves.  If  you 
will  do  thus  and  thus  ;  go  in  such  or  such  ways ; 
so  or  so  far;  leave  off  such  ways  of  fellowship  in 
the  gospel  as  you  have  embraced,  and  think  ac- 
cording unto  the  mind  of  God,  then  you  have  love, 
else  you  have  none  at  all.  How  little  either  unity 
or  love  hath  been  promoted  by  such  principles 
and  practices,  is  now^  evident :  yea,  how  much 
divisions,  animosities,  and  mutual  alienations  of 
minds  and  affections  have  been  increased  by 
them."*     Thus  the  fever  of  sectarian  zeal  has 

*  Owen  on  Jleb.  vi.  10,  vol.  iii.  106,  fol. 


385 

weakened  the  strength,  and  chilled  the  warmth 
of  Catholick  charity. 

2d.  The  same  restricting  zeal  tends  to  expel 
from  the  churches  a  sense  of  their  common  interest 

"  My  church"— "2/^wr  church" — "to  church," 
are  so  incorporated  with  our  habits  of  thinking  and 
acting,  as  to  make  us  nearly  forget  they  are  all 
members  of  one  and  the  same  church  of  God. 
Hence  we  feel  but  little  concern  in  each  other's 
welfare.  The  inspired  rule  has  hardly  any  more 
place  in  our  feelings.  "  Whether  one  member 
suffer,  all  the  members  suffer  with  it ;  or  one  mem- 
ber be  honoured,  all  the  members  rejoice  with  it." 
Their  sufferings  and  their  joys  are  their  own :  we 
sympathize  with  them  in  neither  the  one  nor  the 
other.  Where  is  the  instance  of  a  church  rejoic- 
ing that  the  "  word  of  the  Lord  has  free  course 
and  is  glorified"  in  another  ?  Do  they  not  rather 
rejoice  in  each  other's  hurt  ?  Do  they  not  seize, 
with  evident  satisfaction  and  avidity,  upon  those 
blemishes  which  provide  matter  for  censure,  and 
give  a  plausible  colour  to  comparisons  ?  Are  they 
not  often  eager  to  draw  members  away  from  sis- 
ter churches?  Do  they  not  betray  complacency  in 
accessions  which  build  themselves  up  at  the 
expense  of  pulling  the  others  down  ?  Do  they 
not  view  and  represent  their  increase  by  such 
means,  as  a  proof  that  religion  is  flourishing? 


306 

Their  church  has  indeed  gained :  But  what  is 
gained  by  the  church  of  Christ?  Alas!  this  is  a 
question  which  they  who  "  bite  and  devour  one 
another,"  are  seldom  at  the  trouble  of  asking. 
And  it  is  because  their  king  is  "  God,  and  not 
man,"  that  they  are  not  utterly  "consumed  one 
of  another." 

od.  When  churches  lose  the  sense  of  their 
common  interest,  they  withhold  from  each  other 
that  support  which  it  is  their  duty,  and  might 
otherwise  be  their  inclination,  to  yield. 

Each  leaves  the  other  to  stand  or  fall  by  her- 
self. The  invasions  of  an  adversary  upon  one, 
make  little  impression  upon  the  rest.  They  all 
doze  in  security,  provided  an  attack  be  not  di- 
rectly against  their  own  possessions.  They 
see  errours  spreading,  mischiefs  growing,  which 
their  timely  interposition  might  contribute  to  ar- 
rest ;  and  it  would  not  be  wanting  were  the  case 
formally  their  own :  but  as  matters  are,  "it  is  none 
of  their  business."  They  stand  by  and  let  the  ruin 
work,  till  it  be  too  late ;  and  then  console  them- 
selves with  bearing  their  "  testimony"  against 
evils  which  they  might  have  prevented.  Have 
they  forgotten  that  in  spiritual  as  in  temporal  life, 

tua  res  agitur^  paries  cum  proximus  ardet  ? 

"  your  own  house  is  in  danger  when  your  neigh- 


387 

bour's  wall  is  on  fire  ?"  or  do  they  imagine  that  the 
HOLY  ONE  is  to  be  put  off  with  such  negli- 
gent and  selfish  loyalty  ? 

They  also  decline  to  bear  one  another's  bur- 
dens :  at  least  they  do  so  to  an  extent  which  in- 
fringes upon  every  principle  of  their  relation  as 
parts  of  a  great  whole.  The  good  things  of  this 
world,  where  there  is  no  sort  of  lack,  must  be 
dealt  out,  if  at  all,  with  a  hand  unusually  sparing 
to  those  who  are  not  of  "  our  church."  I  am  far 
from  insinuating  that  the  opulent  do  justice  to 
their  means  or  their  professions  ivithin  the  boun- 
daries of  their  own  sect.  There  is  no  duty  in 
which,  even  thus  narrowed,  they  are  more  gene- 
rally, more  sinfully,  and  more  shamefully,  defi- 
cient :  and  that  they  shall  find,  many  of  them  to 
their  eternal  cost,  when  God  shall  make  them 
feel  that  they  were  only  stewards^  not  proprietors, 
of  their  substance ;  and  shall  arraign  them  at  his 
bar  as  robbers  of  his  treasury.  But  little  as  they 
might  do  in  any  case,  they  do  still  less  than  they 
would  if  the  claims  of  Christ  were  always  backed 
by  the  claims  of  sect.  And  thusxan  affluent 
Christian  district  permits  a  poorer  one  to  pine  and 
languish  through  the  want  of  aid  which  it  could 
most  conveniently  afford.  If  the  history  of  early 
believers,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  may  be 
credited,  "  from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so." 


388 

Their  restricted  communion,  moreover,  teaches 
different  sects  to  dishonour  each  otherh  Christian 
character.  Insomuch  that  the  most  ample  recom- 
mendations from  one  will  not  procure  admission 
to  church-privileges  in  another ;  and  the  mere 
desire  to  go,  upon  whatever  grounds,  from  one  to 
another,  shall  deprive  a  person  of  every  official 
document  of  his  life  and  conversation  ;  let  it  have 
been  ever  so  exemplary  and  edifying.  Not  a 
certificate  of  ecclesiastical  standing  shall  be  giv- 
en ;  though  most  respectfully  asked:  and  a  Chris- 
tian on  whom  there  has  not  lighted  the  breath  of 
accusation,  shall  be  turned  adrift,  like  a  religious 
vagabond,  to  sue  for  the  courtesy  of  any  church 
that  may  please  to  take  him  in.  What  is  this,  but 
to  affront,  in  the  face  of  the  world,  that  particu- 
lar church  which  he  wishes  to  join,  as  though  she 
were  not  of  the  "household  of  God;"  and  to 
treat  him  like  an  apostate  simply  for  preferring 
to  be  under  her  immediate  inspection  ? 

To  so  great  a  length  is  this  temper  indulged, 
as  sometimes  to  corrupt  moral  discipline  in  the 
church  w  here  it  prevails,  and  to  counteract  it  in 
others  where  it  does  not.  Who  can  think,  with- 
out shuddering,  of  a  man's  being  called  up  as  an 
offender^  and  being  required,  on  the  peril  of  cen- 
sure^ to  confess  his  5m,  and  promise  amendment, 
for — what,  Christian  reader,  for  what  ? — why — 


389 

"tell  it  not  in  Gath,  publish  it  not  in  the  streets 
of  Askelon" — for  hearing  "  the  words  of  eternal 
life"  from  the  mouth  of  an  unquestioned  ambas- 
sador of  our  King,  who  has  not  his  credentials 
countersigned  by  US — more  briefly — from  a  mi- 
nister who  is  not  of  our  party ! !  That  hearing  "  the 
glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God"  in  one  of  his 
own  churches,  should  be  accounted  a  cri7ne  and 
2. scandal  in  another!  And  that  an  attempt  to  re- 
move from  one  to  another,  should  subject  his  ser- 
vants to  the  threat  and  the  hazard  of  being  thrown 
out  of  them  all ! — Did  Paul  ever  expect  it  should 
come  to  this  ? 

Even  this  is  not  the  whole.  To  avoid  censure 
for  misconduct,  it  is  not  a  strange  thing  for  some 
people  to  be  seized  with  sudden  fits  of  conscience, 
and  get  most  opportune  illuminations  of  under- 
standing— to  steal  away  to  another  church,  then 
deny  the  jurisdiction  they  have  deserted ;  set  up 
for  peculiar  humility,  zeal,  and  sanctity ;  and  have 
their  claims  admitted^  and  be  themselves  receiv- 
ed, by  the  churches  to  which  they  flee !  Nay,  per- 
sons under  actual  censure  for  immorality^  have 
not  found  it  impracticable  nor  difficult  to  shelter 
themselves  in  churches  which  most  loudly  ac- 
cuse others  of  lukewarmness  and  laxity.  They 
who  hold  themselves  to  be  too  pure  for  commu- 
nion with  their  brethren,  should  not  try  to  destroy 


390 

what  little  vigour  of  discipline  may  be  left,  nor 
open  their  church-bosom  as  an  asylum  for  fugi- 
tives from  the  law  of  God's  house. 

4th.  The  spirit  of  sect  hinders  the  churches 
which  it  governs  from  co-operating  together  in 
promoting  the  kingdom  of  God. 

In  the  United  States,  where,  generally  speak- 
ing, there  is  no  legal  provision  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  religion;  and  especially  among  the 
new  settlements,  there  is  frequently,  in  very  small 
districts,  a  confluence  of  people  from  various  de- 
nominations. Their  junction  makes  a  flourishing 
town,  and  would  make  a  flourishing  church. 
They  agree  in  primary,  and  disagree  in  seconda- 
ry principles :  But  they  will  not,  for  the  sake  of 
the  former,  lay  aside  their  contests  about  the  lat- 
ter. Collectively  they  are  able  to  support  the 
gospel  in  comfort  and  dignity — separately,  they 
cannot  support  it  at  all.  They  will  not  compro- 
mise their  smaller  diff*erences.  Every  one  must 
have  his  own  way;  must  be  completely  gratified 
in  his  predilections.  The  rest  must  come  to  Am; 
he  will  neither  go  to  them^  nor  meet  them  upon 
common  ground :  And  the  result  is,  that  they  all 
experience  alike,  "not  a  famine  of  bread,  nor  a 
thirst  of  water,  but  of  hearing  the  word  of  the 
Lord."  Sanctuary  they  have  none.  They  lose, 
by  degrees,  their  anxiety  for  the  institutions  of 


S9i 

Christ.  Their  feeble  substitutes,  their  small  so- 
cial meetings,  without  the  "  ministers  of  grace," 
soon  die  away.  Their  Sabbaths  are  Pagan:  their 
children  grow  up  in  ignorance,  in  unbelief,  and 
in  vice.  Their  land,  which  smiles  around  them, 
like  the  garden  of  God,  presents  an  unbroken 
scene  of  spiritual  desolation.  In  the  course  of 
one  or  two  generations,  the  knowledge  of  God 
is  almost  obliterated  ;  the  name  of  Jesus  is  a  fo- 
reign sound  ;  his  salvation  an  occult  science  :  and 
while  plenty  crowns  their  board,  and  health  in- 
vigorates their  bodies,  the  bread  of  life  blesses 
not  their  table,  and  moral  pestilence  is  sweeping 
their  souls  into  death.  All  this  from  the  idolatry 
of  "our"  church.  They  might  have  had  Christ 
at  the  expense  of  sect.  They  preferred  sect,  and 
they  are  without  Christ.  How  far  the  mischief 
shall  proceed,  God  only  can  tell.  It  is  enough  to 
fill  our  hearts  with  grief,  and  to  shake  them  with 
terrour,  that  from  the  combination  of  this  with 
other  causes,  we  have  already  a  population  of 
soMEMiLLioNS  of  our own colour, flcsh  and  blood, 
nearly  as  destitute  of  evangelical  mercies  as  the 
savage  who  yells  on  the  banks  of  the  MissourL^ 

*  See,  on  this  subject,  an  interesting  tract  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Lymaw 
Beecher,  "  On  the  importance  of  assisting  young  men  of  parts  and 
talents  in  obtaining  an  education  for  the  gospel  ministry. ^^  pp.  20. 

The  ingenious  and  inquisitive  authour  has  calculated,  from  various 
data,  that  out  of  the  eight  millions  of  souls  which  coiupose  the  popu- 

50 


392 

When  sectarian  jealousy  and  pride  lead  pro- 
fessing Christians  thus  to  sacrifice  themselves 
and  their  children,  it  would  be  vain  to  look  for 
their  concurrence  in  generous  efforts  for  the  good 
of  others. 

How  much  yet  remains  to  be  done  before  "  the 
earth  shall  be  full  of  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah^ 
as  the  waters  cover  the  sea  ;"  how  much  before 
it  fill  the  corners  of  every  Christian  country,  it 
would  be  superfluous  to  show.  "  Darkness  co- 
vers the  earth ;  and  thick  darkness  the  people." 
Millions  after  millions  go  down  to  the  grave  un- 
acquainted with  the  "  grace  which  bringeth  sal- 
vation;" uncheered  by  the  hope  which  conquers 
death.  If  the  world  receive  the  knowledge  of 
"the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  he 


lation  of  the  United  States, ^re  millions  are  either  utterly  without  the 
stated  ordinances  of  the  gospel,  or  are  consigned  to  the  most  illiterate 
ministrations.  Supposing  his  calculations  to  exceed  the  fact,  as  it  is 
difficult  to  be  accurate  upon  so  great  a  scale;  yet,  with  every  reduc- 
tion whicii  fai^tidiousness  itself  can  require,  the  result  is  sufficient  to 
alarm,  to  appal,  and  almost  to  overwhelm,  a  Christian  who  Compares 
the  ratio  of  our  increasing  population,  with  the  probable  supply  of  the 
means  of  grace. 

Several  causes  have  no  donbt  concurred  in  producing  our  deplora* 
ble  state;  but  that  sectarian  jealousies  have  not  withheld  their  full 
amount  of  influence,  seems  not  to  admit  of  a  question.  The  churches 
have  been  in  a  profound  sleep,  as  to  this  momentous  concern.  The 
good  God  awaken  them  with  his  own  voice;  for  every  other  is  wast- 
ed on  the  wind. 


393 

hath  sent,"  they  must  owe  the  blessing  to  those 
who  already  enjoy  the  "  words  of  eternal  life." — 
If  the  banner  of  the  cross  ever  wave  triumphant- 
ly over  the  last  battlements  of  idolatry,  it  must 
be  planted  by  hands  which  have  been  washed  in 
the  blood  of  the  cross. — If  the  doctrines  of  kind- 
ness and  peace  shall  humanize  the  habitations  of 
cruelty,  and  subdue  the  sons  of  blood,  they  must 
flow  from  the  lips  of  those  who  have  "  tasted 
that  the  Lord  is  gracious."     Here  is  a  field  large 
enough  for  their  labours ;  an  object  worthy  of 
their  zeal.     Here  are  conquests  to  be  atchieved 
infinitely  more  splendid  than  any  which  signa- 
lize the  heroes  of  the  sword ;  and  a  "  recompense 
of  reward"  as  far  above  their  brightest  honours, 
as  the  "  crown  of  glory  which  fadeth  not  aAvay," 
is  better  than  the  breath  of  a  "  man  that  shall  die, 
and  the  son  of  man  that  shall  become  as  grass." 
The  enterprise  is  stupendous  ;  the  thought  is  aw- 
ful.    Yet  awful  and  stupendous  as  they  are,  the 
thought  is  to  be  embodied  in  fact,  the  enterprise 
to  be  a  matter  of  history.     So  saith  the  word  of 
our  God.     And  that  Christians,  were  they  hearty 
in  the  cause  ;  half  as  hearty  as  they  are  in  get- 
ting the  "  mammon  of  unrighteousness,"  are  able 
to  accomplish  that  word,  does  not  permit  a  doubt. 
But  for  its  accomplishment  there  must  be  a  uni- 
on of  counsels,  of  confidence,  and  of  strength, 


394 

unknown  in  the  church  since  the  days  of  apos= 
tolick  harmony.  To  such  an  union  nothing  can 
be  more  hostile  than  the  spirit  of  sect.  We  do 
hail  indeed,  with  an  exultation  not  unworthy,  we 
hope,  of  bosoms  which  have  been  touched  by 
celestial  fire,  the  auspicious  dawnings  of  such  a 
day  of  love.  The  truly  gracious  efforts  in  which 
the  land  of  our  fathers,  the  island  of  Great  Bri- 
tain, has  taken  the  lead ;  and  keeps,  and  seems 
destined  to  keep,  the  pre-eminence,  encourage 
us  to  anticipate  things  which  many  prophets  and 
wise  men  have  desired  to  see,  and  have  not  seen 
them.  Eternal  blessings  on  those  children  of  the 
truth  who  have  excited  what  may  one  day  prove  ' 
"  a  general  movement  of  the  church  upon  earth," 
in  order  to  "speak  peace  to  the  heathen!" — Upon 
those  benefactors  of  the  nations,  who  have  pour- 
ed their  offerings  into  the  treasury  of  God,  and 
have  joined  their  hands  with  their  opulence  in 
the  glorious  work  of  sending  the  Bible,  which 
teaches  sinners  what  they  "  must  do  to  be  saved," 
to  "  all  peoples,  and  kindreds,  and  nations,  and 
tongues" — Upon  those  vigilant  sons  and  daugh- 
ters of  charity,  who  have  gone  out  into  the  "  high- 
ways and  hedges"  of  the  country — into  the 
"streets  and  lanes"  of  the  city,  "to  seek,"  like 
their  adorable  Redeemer, "  and  to  save  that  which 
was  lost;"  to  bring  the  Sabbath,  with  its  mercies^ 


395 

into  the  cabins  of  the  poor,  and  the  houses  of  the 
profane ;  andto  train  up,  by  labours  worthy  of  the 
Lord's  day,  for  "  glory,  honour,  and  immortal- 
ity," those  wretched  outcasts  who  w^ere  candi- 
dates for  infamy  in  this  world,  and  for  perdition 
in  the  next ! 

Whose  heart  does  not  swell  with  transport? 
Whose  lips  do  not  pour  forth  benedictions  ?  Who 
that  names  the  name  of  Christ  can  refuse  his 
"  God  speed  ?"  But  what  do  these  things  involve, 
and  how  have  they  been  accomplished  ?  See  it, 
O  disciple  of  Jesus,  and  rejoice! — They  involve, 
they  have  been  accomplished  by,  the  prevalence 
of  the  Christian  over  ^/le  Sectarian!  No  such 
thing  was  attempted  by  modern  believers;  no 
such  honours  encircled  their  brow,  till  the  "  Sun 
of  righteousness,  arising  upon  them  with  heal- 
ing in  his  wings,"  melted  their  ices,  warmed 
their  soil,  and  made  their  sectarian  "wilderness 
to  blossom  as  the  rose." 

Stronger  proof  of  the  baleful  and  blasting  in- 
fluence of  sect  on  the  "  kingdom  of  God,"  no 
man  can  ask,  than  the  fact,  now  notorious  to  the 
whole  world,  that  what  has  been  thus  effected  for 
the  one,  has  been  done  at  the  expense  of  the 
other.  If  he  wishes  for  confirmation,  let  him  cast 
his  eyes  around.  Let  him  see  in  the  caution,  the 
management,  the  address,  which  Christians  of  a 


396 

Catholick  spirit  are  obliged  to  employ — in  the 
slanders  which,  though  refuted  on  the  spot,  and 
put  to  deeper  and  deeper  shame  by  every  mo- 
ment of  experience,  still  rear  their  front  and 
maintain  their  hardihood — in  the  coldness,  shy- 
ness, distance,  of  some  Christian  churches,  who 
come  not  YET  "  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against 
the  mighty" — let  him  see  in  these  things  how 
strong  a  rampart  sectarianism  throws  up  around 
the  camp  of  the  Devil!  Let  him  shiver  with  hor- 
rour  when  he  hears,  not  from  lying  Fame  but 
from  unvarnishing  Verity,  that  whole  denomina- 
tions are  to  be  found — denominations  sound  in 
the  faith  of  Jesus,  who  are  utterly  unable  to  im- 
part the  gospel  to  perishing  Pagans  and  Pagan- 
ized Christians  ;  and  who  nevertheless,  a  few  in- 
dividuals excepted,  will  not  lift  a  finger,  will  not 
contribute  a  farthing,  toward  enlightening  their 
darkness ;  because,  forsooth,  the  candle  cannot 
be  carried  in  their  candlestick!  What  shall  we, 
what  can  we  say  to  such  reluctance  ?  Does  it  ad- 
mit of  more  than  one  interpretation?  viz.  that 
they  had  rather  these  their  poor  fellow-sinners 
should  sink  down  to  hell  under  the  brand  of  the 
curse,  than  rise  up  to  heaven  with  the  "  image 
and  superscription"  of  the  Son  of  God,  unless 
their  own  name  be  entwined  with  his  in  the  coro- 
net of  life  ?  They  mean  not  so :  they  think  not 


397 

so :  they  shrink  and  tremble  at  the  very  idea. 
Then  it  is  time  for  them  to  examine  by  another 
standard  than  has  regulated  too  many  of  their 
proceedings,  whether  their  deeds  have  not  said 
so ;  and  whether  justice  to  their  best  principles 
and  affections  does  not  require  them  to  change 
their  course ! 

III.  We  have  yet  to  survey  this  sectarian  fel- 
lowship from  another  point  of  view — its  effects 
on  the  surrounding  world, 

1st.  The  first  effect  is  visible,  and  has  already 
been  noticed.  Many,  who  might  have  rejoiced 
in  the  light  of  life,  had  Christian  churches  been 
more  concerned  for  the  kingdom  of  God  than  for 
the  predominance  of  party,  are  left  to  darkness 
and  ruin.  Let  not  the  eager  partizan  who  might 
have  put  forth  his  helping  hand  to  save  them  from 
the  pit,  but  would  not,  imagine  that  his  negligence 
will  be  unnoticed  when  God  "  maketh  inquisi- 
tion for  blood."  The  eternal  death  of  multitudes 
lies  at  the  door  of  our  unseemly  strife. 

2d.  We  hinder  the  success  of  the  gospel  where 
it  is  enjoyed  even  m  purity. 

With  what  face  do  we  praise  our  religion  as 
the  religion  of  love,  when  we  live,  or  behave  as 
if  we  lived,  in  enmity  ?  If  the  same  jealousies,  ri- 
valships,  antipathies,  and  other  passions  which 


398 

reign  among  secular  men,  reign,  or  appear  to 
reign,  among  us  also,  how  shall  we  prove  that 
we  are  better  than  they  ?  What  can  we  per- 
suade them  to  think  of  the  church  but  that  she  is 
their  own  world  in  disguise,  and  so  much  the 
worse  for  her  claims  to  sanctity?  If,  without 
even  the  pretence  of  differing  about  essential 
truths,  sect  clash  with  sect  as  harshly  and  un- 
kindly as  any  political  factions  whatever,  how 
shall  the  one  take  precedence  of  the  other  in  the 
scale  of  moral  probity  ? 

These  inquiries  are  too  natural  not  to  rise  in 
the  mind  of  every  reflecting  man  of  the  world. 
Have  they  no  tendency  to  put  him  further  and 
further  from  the  faith  of  Jesus?  to  harden  his 
heart  against  the  gospel  of  immortality  ?  to  ren- 
der its  very  terms  designating  moral  character  ; 
such  as  "  good  conscience" — "  spiritual-minded- 
ness" — "self-denial" — "  bearing  the  cross" — "fol- 
lowing Christ,"  &c.  suspicious,  ifnot  odious  in  his 
eyes  ?  Whence  proceed  his  sneers,  his  ridicule,  his 
flings  of  "hypocrisy," — "fanaticism," — "priest- 
craft," and  the  other  contemptuous  phrases  with 
which  his  vocabulary  is  so  plentifully  stocked? 
"  From  the  enmity  of  his  depraved  heart,"  you 
will  say — "  because  the  natural  man  receiveth  not 
the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God."  Doubtless.  But 
is  there  no  stimulus  to  his  enmity  in  the  scan  da- 


399 

lous  spectacle  of  those  who  profess  "  one  Lordj 
one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  hope  of  their  call- 
ing," playing  the  Jew  and  the  Samaritan  toward 
each  other? — without  communion,  without  confi- 
dence, without  religious  ^'cieiiings"  together — 
alienated,  sundered,  opposed,  as  if  their  title  to 
heaven  were  founded  in  their  mutual  hostility  ? 
Do  not  these  things  cause  him  to  err,  and  turn 
the  Rock  of  salvation  into  "  a  stone  of  stumbling 
and  rock  of  offence  ?"  Do  they  not  avert  his  eye 
from  the  beauty  of  Zion ;  stop  his  ears  against 
the  eulogy  of  her  converts;  and  put  into  his 
mouth  that  bitter  and  biting  taunt,  "These 
Christians  have  just  religion  enough  to  hate  one 
another  heartily  ?" 

Shall  we  wonder  at  bis  mistake  ?  How  should 
he  recognise  believers  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  if  they 
do  not  seem  to  recognise  each  other  ?  For  in  very 
deed,  sectarians  are  Christians  in  disguise.  The 
sectarian  stands  foremost,  the  Christian  behind. 
Sectarian  distinctions  are  masks :  sectarian  cham- 
pions, ecclesiastical  knights  covered  with  their 
armour,  themselves  unseen.  The  masks  are  of 
all  hues  and  all  features.  They  must  be  removed 
before  you  can  perceive  that  the  combatants  are 
of  one  species.  Sectarianism  stripped  off,  you 
see  the  Christians.  You  discover  the  identity  of 
race — the  family  features — those  beautiful  fea- 

51 


400 

tures  in  which  they  resemble  their  Father  who  is 
in  heaven  ;  and  are  "  conformed  to  the  image  of 
the  first-born  among  many  brethren." 

Blessed  likeness !  enchanting  loveliness  !  Are 
the  painted  earth-made  vizors  which  conceal  "the 
human  face  divine,"  and  substitute,  in  its  room, 
their  own  deformed  and  forbidding  visages,  worth 
the  price  they  cost  us  ?  worth  the  conflicts  which 
have  all  the  pains  of  military  warfare  without  its 
recompense?  and  all  the  hardihood  of  chivalry 
without  its  generosity  ?  worth  the  broken  unity, 
the  blighted  peace,  the  tarnished  beauty,  the  pros- 
trate energy,  the  humbled  honour,  of  the  church 
of  God  ?  Ah  no !  Our  hearts /ee/  that  they  are  not. 
What  then  remains  but  to  lay  aside  our  petty 
contests  ?  to  strike  our  hands  in  a  covenant  of 
love — a  "  holy  league,"  offensive  and  defensive, 
for  the  common  Christianity — to  present  our  con- 
solidated front  to  the  legions  of  errour  and  death ; 
and  march  on,  under  the  command  and  conduct 
of  the  Captain  of  our  salvation,  till  the  nations 
mingle  their  shouts  in  that  thundering  Alleluia--^ 
"  The  Lord  God  Omnipotent  reigneth !" 


FINIS. 


